We performed a comparison between Coverity and SonarCloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Coverity is the wrapper. We use the wrapper to build the C++ component, then we use the other code analysis to analyze the code to the build object, and then send back the result to the SonarQube server. Additionally, it is a powerful capabilities solution."
"It's very stable."
"The product has been beneficial in logging functionality, allowing me to categorize vulnerabilities based on severity. This aids in providing updated reports on subsequent scans."
"The solution has improved our code quality and security very well."
"One of the most valuable features is Contributing Events. That particular feature helps the developer understand the root cause of a defect. So you can locate the starting point of the defect and figure out exactly how it is being exploited."
"It's pretty stable. I rate the stability of Coverity nine out of ten."
"It provides reports about a lot of potential defects."
"This solution is easy to use."
"Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service."
"The solution can be installed locally."
"The most valuable features of SonarCloud are the ability to discover vulnerabilities, security weak points, security hotspots, and all the feedback that comes into the feature branch. You can deploy the code with the security, you can eliminate the problem at the developer level rather than identifying the problem in the productions."
"The reports from SonarCloud are very good."
"The solution provides continuous code analysis which has improved the quality of our code. It can raise alarms on vulnerabilities with immediate reports on the dashboard. Few things are false positives and we can customize the rules."
"I'm not implementing the solutions. However, I've talked to the people who deploy the tools, and they are happy with how easy setting up SonarCloud is."
"SonarCloud is overall a good tool for identifying code smells, bugs, and code duplication, but we've found that using Android Lint is more effective for our needs."
"The most valuable feature of SonarCloud is its overall performance."
"Its price can be improved. Price is always an issue with Synopsys."
"There should be additional IDE support."
"When I put my code into Coverity for scanning, the code information of the product is in the system. The solution could be improved by providing a SBOM, a software bill of material."
"The level of vulnerability that this solution covers could be improved compared to other open source tools."
"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."
"They could improve the usability. For example, how you set things up, even though it's straightforward, it could be still be easier."
"Coverity could improve the ease of use. Sometimes things become difficult and you need to follow the guides from the website but the guides could be better."
"It should be easier to specify your own validation routines and sanitation routines."
"SonarCloud's UI needs enhancement."
"The solution needs to improve its customization and flexibility."
"The documentation needs improvement on optimizing build time for seamless CI/CD integration with our Android apps."
"I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers."
"It would be helpful if notifications could go out to an extra person."
"SonarCloud can improve the false positives. Sometimes the gates sometimes act a little weird. We then need to manually go and mark the false positive."
"We had some issues with the scanner."
"The reports could improve by providing more information. We are not able to use the reports in our operation until they are improved. Additionally, if the vendor provided more customization capabilities it would be a benefit."
Coverity is ranked 4th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 33 reviews while SonarCloud is ranked 10th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 10 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.8, while SonarCloud is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarCloud writes "Beneficial vulnerability discovery, simple to maintain, and proactive support". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Seeker, whereas SonarCloud is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, GitLab and Fortify on Demand. See our Coverity vs. SonarCloud report.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
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.