Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apiiro vs SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Apiiro
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
20th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (11th), API Security (11th), Software Supply Chain Security (8th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (12th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (4th)
SonarQube Server (formerly ...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
116
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (1st), Software Development Analytics (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Apiiro is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) is 23.9%, down from 27.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Ryan-Murphy - PeerSpot reviewer
A great secrets detection feature, good visibility, and integrates well
The biggest benefit of Apiiro for us was the visibility it gave us into our GitHub organization, which we didn't have much of before. The benefit of adding Apiiro early is that it would be integrated into our pipeline from the start. Since we have had some of our software products for many years, we would have to do a lot of cleaning up before integrating Apiiro into our developer workflow. Integrating Apiiro early allows us to stay ahead of the curve on security issues and address them as they arise, rather than having a huge backlog for developers to fix. Apiiro's ability to provide visibility into the risk of our application components is great. This was a selling feature for us. Apiiro was a less mature product a little over a year ago when they were still early on in their development. However, they have made fantastic advancements over the last year, which has given us much more visibility into that sort of thing. Apiiro has helped prevent business-critical risks by making recommendations based on what it thinks is a high or critical issue. I think it does a pretty good job at that, but those recommendations still need a manual review from us. In general, if Apiiro flags a critical issue, it is usually pretty close to identifying whether it is business-critical or not. It is something we should review, even if we end up downgrading it. Apiiro raises valid concerns, and I am happy that it does.
Sthembiso Zondi - PeerSpot reviewer
Consistent improvements in code quality and security with effective integration and reliable technical support
The features of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) that I find most useful are the suggestions received from reviewing the code. When they review the code, they provide suggestions on how to fix it, and we find those very useful from a development perspective. We use SonarQube Server's (formerly SonarQube) centralized management and visualization of code quality metrics on the dashboard because that's the executive dashboard that we send to the executives to show where we are in terms of quality, security, and where the company can improve. We use that for organizational improvement purposes. The ability to tailor metrics tracking in SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) has been beneficial to my team. There are team-specific dashboards which are related to specific repositories they utilize, and we have that aggregative dashboard that shows the whole organization's performance. We can drill down per specific repository, which makes it easier for the team to improve specific things.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The workflow automation is likely the best aspect of the solution."
"Apiiro's secrets detection feature has saved us several times, which we appreciate greatly."
"The integrations SonarQube provides with our software delivery pipeline are very seamless."
"The tool helps us to monitor and manage violations. It manages the bugs and security violations."
"Using SonarQube has helped us to identify areas of technical debt to work on, resulting in better code, fewer vulnerabilities, and fewer bugs."
"SonarQube has a lot of value, it reviews the basic coding standards and security vulnerabilities of code that help to reduce issues."
"It provides you with many features, as it does with the premium model, but there are still extra features that can be purchased if needed."
"It assists during the development with SonarLint and helps the developer to change his approach or rather improve his coding pattern or style. That's one advantage I've seen. Another advantage is that we can customize the rules."
"Overall, I would rate SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) as a 9 out of 10."
"The static code analysis is very good."
 

Cons

"User management is a little bit clunky."
"I would like support for our self-hosted Git server, other than GitHub, just regular Git."
"In terms of what can be improved, the areas that need more attention in the solution are its architecture and development."
"The product provides false reports sometimes."
"The tool needs to be more compatible with C/C++ language"
"The software testing tool capability could improve. It does not always integrate well. You have to use a specific plugin and the plugin does not always go in Apple's applications."
"Their dashboarding is very limited. They can improve their dashboards for multiple areas, such as security review, maintainability, etc. They have all this information, so they should publish all this information on the dashboard so that the users can view the summary and then analyze it further. This is something that I would like to see in the next version."
"We did have some trouble with the LDAP integration for the console."
"The interface could be a little better and should be enhanced."
"It requires advanced heuristics to recognize more complex constructs that could be disregarded as issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The tool's pricing is reasonable."
"As a user and a consumer of this solution, it can be pricey for my company to support and use, even though there are many benefits. For this reason, we use the free version. In the future, as our product cycles develop and evolve at a more steady pace, we hope to invest in the licensing for this tool."
"My guess is that we have a yearly subscription. We use it quite extensively, so a monthly license wouldn't make sense. Yearly subscriptions are usually cheaper. In addition to the standard licensing fee, there is just the cost of running the hardware where it is hosted."
"I use the full trial version of SonarQube."
"SonarQube is a fairly affordable solution for a larger scale if you have a specific role or specific department for secure code."
"I do not know about the pricing as I am using the community edition, which is free. But I compared the pricing with Sigma, and it is higher than SonarQube."
"We pay €10 per month for this solution, which is good. It provides a good value for money."
"We're using an older version because it is the open-source flavor of it and we can continue using it at no cost. We're not paying any licensing at all, which was another factor in choosing this route so that we can learn and grow with it and not be committed to licenses and other similar things. If we choose to get something else, we have to relearn, but we don't have to relicense. Basically, we're paying no license costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Apiiro?
Apiiro's secrets detection feature has saved us several times, which we appreciate greatly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apiiro?
My understanding is the pricing is pretty competitive.
What needs improvement with Apiiro?
Apiiro recently integrated SaaS, and we would love to see them expand on that. They provide many integrations to different products, including SaaS products such as Snyk. Ideally, Apiiro would incl...
Is SonarQube the best tool for static analysis?
I am not very familiar with SonarQube and their solutions, so I can not answer. But if you are asking me about which tools that are the best for for Static Code Analysis, I suggest you have a look...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...
How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?
We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...
 

Also Known As

Apiiro Control Plane (ASOC), Apiiro API Security (SAST), Apiiro Open Source (SCA)
Sonar
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Morgan Stanley, Rakuten, Jack Henry, SoFi, Colgate, Navan
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Apiiro vs. SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.