We performed a comparison between CodeSonar and SonarQube based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."
"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."
"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."
"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."
"It has been able to scale."
"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."
"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."
"I follow Quality Gate's graduation model within organization, and it is extremely helpful for me to benchmark products."
"The most valuable features are the wide array of languages, multiple languages per project, the breakdown of bugs, and the description of vulnerabilities and code smells (best practices)."
"The most valuable features are the dashboard reports and the ease of integrating it with Jenkins."
"The solution can verify vulnerabilities, code smells, and hotspots. It makes the software more secure and it helps make a junior or novice developer sharper."
"There's plenty of documentation available to users."
"SonarQube is designed well making it easy to use, simple to identify issues and find solutions to problems."
"The software quality gate streamlines the product's quality."
"Strong code evaluation for budget-minded clients."
"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."
"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."
"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."
"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."
"It was expensive."
"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."
"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."
"The security in SonarQube could be better."
"We previously experienced issues with security but a segregated security violation has been implemented and the issues we experienced are being fixed."
"If there was an official Docker image of SonarQube that could easily integrate into the pipeline would help the user to plug in and plug out and use it directly without any custom configuration. I am not sure if this is being offered already in an update but it would be very helpful."
"We've been using the Community Edition, which means that we get to use it at our leisure, and they're kind enough to literally give it to us. However, it takes a fair amount of effort to figure out how to get everything up and running. Since we didn't go with the professional paid version, we're not entitled to support. Of course that could be self-correcting if we were to make the step to buy into this and really use it. Then their technical support would be available to us to make strides for using it better."
"From a reporting perspective, we sometimes have problems interpreting the vulnerability scan reports. For example, if it finds a possible threat, our analysts have to manually check the provided reports, and sometimes we have issues getting all the data needed to properly verify if it's accurate or not."
"The product provides false reports sometimes."
"SonarQube is not development-centric like Snyk."
"SonarQube could improve its static application security testing as per the industry standard."
CodeSonar is ranked 21st in Application Security Tools with 7 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 111 reviews. CodeSonar is rated 8.2, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CodeSonar writes "Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". CodeSonar is most compared with Coverity, Klocwork, Polyspace Code Prover, Semgrep Code and Fortify Static Code Analyzer, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and HCL AppScan. See our CodeSonar vs. SonarQube report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.