We performed a comparison between Coverity and Polyspace Code Prover based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)."Coverity is scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."
"Coverity gives advisory and deviation features, which are some of the parts I liked."
"I encountered a bug with Coverity, and I opened a ticket. Support provided me with a workaround. So it's working at the moment, or at least it seems to be."
"It's very stable."
"Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."
"Provides software security, and helps to find potential security bugs or defects."
"It has the lowest false positives."
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."
"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"The outputs are very reliable."
"We use GitHub and Gitflow, and Coverity does not fit with Gitflow. I have to create a screen for our branches, and it's a pain for developers. It has been difficult to integrate Coverity with our system."
"The level of vulnerability that this solution covers could be improved compared to other open source tools."
"The solution could use more rules."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"Coverity is far from perfection, and I'm not 100 percent sure it's helping me find what I need to find in my role. We need exactly what we are looking for, i.e. security errors and vulnerabilities. It doesn't seem to be reporting while we are changing our code."
"We'd like it to be faster."
"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."
"Right now, the Coverity executable is around 1.2GB to download. If they can reduce it to approximately 600 or 700MB, that would be great. If they decrease the executable, it will be much easier to work in an environment like Docker."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"The tool has some stability issues."
Coverity is ranked 4th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 33 reviews while Polyspace Code Prover is ranked 23rd in Application Security Tools with 5 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.8, while Polyspace Code Prover is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polyspace Code Prover writes "A stable solution for developing software components". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Polaris Software Integrity Platform, whereas Polyspace Code Prover is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, CodeSonar, Parasoft SOAtest and GitLab.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.
