No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

CAST Highlight vs SonarQube comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

CAST Highlight
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (18th)
SonarQube
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
136
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (1st), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (1st), Software Development Analytics (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

CAST Highlight and SonarQube aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. CAST Highlight is designed for Software Composition Analysis (SCA) and holds a mindshare of 1.2%, up 0.9% compared to last year.
SonarQube, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 14.5% mindshare, down 25.8% since last year.
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
CAST Highlight1.2%
Snyk10.6%
Black Duck SCA10.5%
Other77.7%
Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SonarQube14.5%
Checkmarx One9.2%
Snyk5.2%
Other71.1%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Jayanti Rode - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Associate Manager at Accenture
Identifies migration blockers and boosters while facing challenges with platform-specific roadblocks
The solution provides agnostic blockers for platforms as well as for containerization. Within that containerization, it offers generic blockers. However, my project might require it to provide Windows-specific blockers or Linux-specific blockers, as I often work with only one platform at a time. If I received categorization in containerization blockers, it would save time. Understanding only the OS-specific blockers means I would avoid resolving irrelevant issues, thus saving time. Initially, I receive a response from support, however, if there is involvement from R&D or other teams, it may take longer than expected. The support team is challenging when sharing source code. As this is a static code analysis tool, it sometimes requires source code for R&D. However, CAST clients may be restricted from sharing due to business logic and nondisclosure agreements. This creates a challenge, and I may have to share pseudo code or seek client approval, risking escalation.
KH
Sr Software Engineering Supervisor at Mozarc Medical
Gains control over rule customization and achieves reliable vulnerability assessment
The deployment process took me about 2 or 3 hours to deploy SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube), although I do not remember exactly since it was done about 2 years back. Currently, about 10 of my developers are using SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) in my company. I do not have plans to increase the usage of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) in the future as there will not be any requirement to increase. I am a senior software engineer and supervisor at Mozark Medical. My corporate email address is karthik.k.a.r.t.h.i.k.h.a.r.p.a.n.h.a.l.l.i@mozarkmedical.com. Overall, I would rate SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) as a 9 out of 10.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The way it tells you which codebase is more ready for the cloud and which codebase is less ready is very valuable. It works seamlessly with most languages."
"The most valuable features of the CAST Highlight are the interface and there are three notations that are very simple to understand and communicate with."
"In cloud migration, I use CAST highlight to identify blockers, which are the negative road patterns, and also the boosters, which are positive code patterns."
"CAST Highlight is easy to use and has a good dashboard."
"The way it tells you which codebase is more ready for the cloud and which codebase is less ready is very valuable, and it works seamlessly with most languages."
"It offers good performance."
"We've been using it for two years and found that it is really profitable to have the product in our arsenal."
"We are using CAST Highlight for the location because it's an indicator for us that can differentiate us from the other health insurance company, and we are using the indicator as proof of the quality of service for our application."
"The solution has a wide variety of features and an open-source community that you are able to learn Java, JavaScript, or any other programing language."
"This product has helped us improve the quality of code within the business and ensure all new developers keep to a similar code convention per project."
"It helps our developers work more efficiently as we can identify things in a code prior to it being pushed to where it needs to go."
"We previously used Codacy, but we switched to SonarCloud because of their good reputation and we compared reports from both of them and SonarCloud seems to be more accurate."
"The product is simple."
"We have the software metrics that SonarQube gives us, which is something we did not have before, and this helps us work towards aiming coding standards to empower us to move in the direction of better code quality."
"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."
"SonarQube is easy for me; I am recruiting buggy code with this, and it is reporting, showing that this code should not be like this and the reason for it, such as advising when you should declare a static function or why you should or should not initialize a variable, which is an amazing feature."
 

Cons

"The ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight."
"There could be potential improvements or additional features added to CAST Highlight to make it better."
"Technical support could be better."
"Its price should be better. It is a pretty costly tool. They have two products: CAST Highlight and CAST AIP. I would expect CAST Highlight to have the Help dashboard and the Engineering dashboard. These dashboards are currently a part of CAST AIP, and if these are made available in CAST Highlight, customers won't have to use two different products all the time."
"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution. However, CAST Highlight is less expensive than the CAST AIP, but it remains too expensive and the professional services from CAST are also too expensive."
"It is a pretty costly tool. A lot of customers are resistant to using it."
"CAST Highlight could improve to allow us to comment and do a deep analysis by ourselves."
"There's a bit of a learning curve at the outset."
"CI/CD pipeline is part of a whole chain of design, development, and production, and it's becoming increasingly crucial to optimize the various tools across different stages. However, it's still a silo approach because the full integration is missing. This isn't just an issue with SonarCloud. It's a general problem with tooling."
"The scanning part could be improved in SonarQube. We have used Coverity for scanning, and we have the critical issues reported by Coverity; when we used SonarQube for scanning and looked at the results, it seems that some of them have incorrect input, and this part can be improved for C and C++ languages."
"There's room for improvement in the configuration process, particularly during the initial setup phase."
"It does not provide deeper scanning of vulnerabilities in an application, on a live session. This is something we are not happy about. Maybe the reason for that is we are running the community edition currently, but other editions may improve on that aspect."
"This solution finds issues that are similar to what is found by Checkmarx, and it would be nice if the overlap could be eliminated."
"Technical support and the price could be better."
"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."
"It requires advanced heuristics to recognize more complex constructs that could be disregarded as issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution. However, CAST Highlight is less expensive than the CAST AIP, but it remains too expensive and the professional services from CAST are also too expensive. The high price is part of the problem with the CAST solutions."
"It is a pretty costly tool. A lot of customers are resistant to using it."
"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution."
"Basic support is included with the standard licensing feed but it can be upgraded for an additional cost."
"The development license cost is reasonable, and we've had no concerns about SonarQube when it comes to cost."
"We are using the Developer Edition and the cost is based on the amount of code that is being processed."
"Get the paid version which allows the customized dashboard and provides technical support."
"People can try the free licenses and later can seek buying plugins/support, etc. once they started liking it."
"The price point on SonarQube is good."
"We pay €10 per month for this solution, which is good. It provides a good value for money."
"The developer edition is based on cost per lines of code."
"The product’s price is lower than Veracode’s price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions are best for your needs.
886,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business43
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise79
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CAST Highlight?
The pricing of CAST Highlight was not considered expensive or cheap, and no specific comment was made about the setup cost.
What needs improvement with CAST Highlight?
The solution provides agnostic blockers for platforms as well as for containerization. Within that containerization, it offers generic blockers. However, my project might require it to provide Wind...
What is your primary use case for CAST Highlight?
For CAST, I use it in cloud migration roadmap and in open source safety issues. These are my two main use cases.
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...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Sonar, SonarQube Cloud
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Wells Fargo, Bank of NY Mellon, Northern Trust, Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, BMW, AT&T, US Army, US Air Force, US Navy, John Hancock, Marsh & McLennan, Ernst & Young, PwC, Volkswagen, Boston Consulting Group, London Stock Exchange, Telefonica, Saur France, Total Energies France, SNCF
Snowflake, Booking.com, Deutsche Bank, AstraZeneca, and Ford Motor Company.
Find out what your peers are saying about CAST Highlight vs. SonarQube and other solutions. Updated: September 2022.
886,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.