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
135
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

"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."
"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 most valuable features of CAST Highlight are automation and speed."
"It offers good performance."
"The solution provides agnostic blockers for platforms as well as for containerization."
"CAST Highlight provides a clear overview of the role portfolio and allows users to assess the overall quality of the environment. Users can see where improvements are needed and follow up on trends of the application."
"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."
"CAST Highlight is easy to use and has a good dashboard."
"SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) has had a positive impact on my organization by giving the best impact for code checking and code structuring, making the code more usable and better."
"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."
"The reporting and the results are quick. It gets integrated within the pipeline well."
"This is a good solution if you are looking for good coverage, quality, and vulnerabilities to be highlighted."
"The code coverage feature is very good."
"What I like about SonarQube is the integration of the pipelines."
"SonarQube plays a key role in this endeavour and provides Senior Management oversight across multiple project teams and business deliveries."
"All the features of the solution are quite good."
 

Cons

"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 reports that describe the issues of concern are rather abstract and the issues should be more clearly described to the user."
"If I received categorization in containerization blockers, it would save time."
"There's a bit of a learning curve at the outset."
"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."
"Technical support could be better."
"There could be potential improvements or additional features added to CAST Highlight to make it better."
"The ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight."
"Any suggestions for potential improvements may include bill of materials functionality."
"SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) could be improved on the reporting front. Instead of grouping, I would prefer to scan the code as part of development and then generate a report on a daily basis among different units or projects, which is currently complicated."
"When we have a thousand products published over it, we expect it to be more efficient in terms of serving requests from the browser."
"There is need for support for the additional languages and ease of use in adding new rules for detecting issues."
"I have found this solution creates more noise than competitors."
"We had some issues scanning the master branch but when we upgraded to version 7.9 we noticed it does scan the master branch but we had to do a workaround for it to happen. This process could be improved in a future release."
"SonarQube needs to improve its support model. They do not work 24/7, and they do not provide weekend support in case things go wrong."
"The solution is a bit lacking on the security side, in terms of finding and identifying vulnerabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution."
"Basic support is included with the standard licensing feed but it can be upgraded for an additional cost."
"It is a pretty costly tool. A lot of customers are resistant to using it."
"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."
"SonarQube enterprise, I am not sure of the price but from what I understand they are charging a fee. It's is not clear if it is an annual fee or a one-off."
"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."
"Compared to similar solutions, SonarQube was more accessible to us and had more benefits, with regards to size of the code base and supported languages. Apart from the Enterprise licensing fee, there are no additional costs."
"We use the solution free of cost."
"I was using the Community Edition, which is available free of charge."
"It's an open-source solution, with no additional costs."
"We pay €10 per month for this solution, which is good. It provides a good value for money."
"The free version of SonarQube does everything that we need it to."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions are best for your needs.
886,077 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
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.
886,077 professionals have used our research since 2012.