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

Checkmarx One vs Coverity vs SonarQube Server (formerly 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 9.5%, down from 12.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Coverity is 7.2%, up from 6.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) is 22.7%, down from 27.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Syed Hasan - PeerSpot reviewer
Partner experiences excellent technical support and seamless initial setup
In my opinion, if we are able to extract or show the report, and because everything is going towards agent tech and GenAI, it would be beneficial if it could get integrated with our code base and do the fix automatically. It could suggest how the code base is written and automatically populate the source code with three different solution options to choose from. This would be really helpful.
Jaile Sebes - PeerSpot reviewer
Resolving critical software issues demands faster implementation and better integration
We use Coverity primarily to find issues such as software bugs and memory leaks, especially in C++ and C# projects. It helps us identify deadlocks, synchronization issues, and product crashes Coverity has been instrumental in resolving product crashes by detecting various issues like deadlocks.…
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

"Checkmarx pinpoints the vulnerability in the code and also presents the flow of malicious input across the application."
"The administration in Checkmarx is very good."
"Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are difficult to pinpoint because of the way the functionalities and the features are intertwined, it's difficult to say which part of them I prefer most. You initiate the scan, you have a scan, you have the review set, and reporting, they all work together as one whole process. It's not like accounting software, where you have the different features, et cetera."
"It is very useful because it fits our requirements. It is also easy to use. It is not complex, and we are satisfied with the results."
"The reports are very good because they include details on the code level, and make suggestions about how to fix the problems."
"It allows for SAST scanning of uncompiled code. Further, it natively integrates with all key repos formats (Git, TFS, SVN, Perforce, etc)."
"Helps us check vulnerabilities in our SAP Fiori application."
"Provides software security, and helps to find potential security bugs or defects."
"The most valuable feature is that there were not a whole lot of false positives, at least on the codebases that I looked at."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."
"The tool as it is can be used for code quality improvement."
"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
"We consider it a handy tool that helps to resolve our issues immediately."
"The initial setup is simple. It requires some security, but it's simple."
"Before you even compile, it can catch known vulnerability issues or patterns."
"Can tweak rules and feed them into our build pipelines."
"Some of the most valuable features have been the latest up-to-date of the OWASP, the monitoring, the reporting, and the ease of use with the IDE plugins, in terms of integration."
"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."
"This solution is simple to use and can be quickly deployed."
"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."
 

Cons

"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"The integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."
"It provides us with quite a handful of false positive issues. If Checkmarx could reduce this number, it would be a great tool to use."
"There is nothing particular that I don't like in this solution. It can have more integrations, but the integrations that we would like are in the roadmap anyway, and they just need to deliver the roadmap. What I like about the roadmap is that it is going where it needs to go. If I were to look at the roadmap, there is nothing that is jumping out there that says to me, "Yeah. I'd like something else on the roadmap." What they're looking to deliver is what I would expect and forecast them to deliver."
"Micro-services need to be included in the next release."
"As the solution becomes more complex and feature rich, it takes more time to debug and resolve problems. Feature-wise, we have no complaints, but Checkmarx becomes harder to maintain as the product becomes more complex. When I talk to support, it takes them longer to fix the problem than it used to."
"The statistics module has a function that allows you to show some statistics, but I think it's limited. Maybe it needs more information."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it seems outdated."
"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."
"Coverity's implementation cycle is very slow when integrating changes, especially for problems related to event handling and memory leaks."
"The tool needs to improve its reporting."
"I had tried integrating the tool with Azure DevOps, but the report I got stated that my team faced many challenges."
"It should be easier to specify your own validation routines and sanitation routines."
"They could improve the usability. For example, how you set things up, even though it's straightforward, it could be still be easier."
"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 not stable."
"SonarQube could improve by adding automatic creation of tasks after scanning and more support for the Czech language."
"For improvement, this solution could be offered on Docker and the cloud and the support for this solution could be improved. Customizing rules could also be made simpler."
"Dynamic scanning is missing and there are some issues with security scanning."
"A little bit more emphasis on security and a bit more security scanning features would be nice."
"The reporting is good, but I am not able to download a specific report as a PDF, so downloading reports is something that should be looked at."
"A robust credential scanner would be a huge bonus as it would remove the need for yet another niche product."
"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."
"Currently requires multiple tools, lacking one overall tool."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is an expensive solution."
"​Checkmarx is not a cheap scanning tool, but none of the security tools are cheap. Checkmarx is a powerful scanning tool, and it’s essential to have one of these products."
"It's relatively expensive."
"We got a special offer for a 30% reduction for three years, after our first year. I think for a real source-code scanning tool, you have to add a lot of money for Open Source Analysis, and AppSec Coach (160 Euro per user per year)."
"Its price is fair. It is in or around the right spot. Ultimately, if the price is wrong, customers won't commit, but they do tend to commit. It is neither too cheap nor too expensive."
"The license has a vague language around P1 issues and the associated support. Make sure to review these in order to align them with your organizational policies."
"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."
"It is a good product but a little overpriced."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"This is a pretty expensive solution. The overall value of the solution could be improved if the price was reduced. Licensing is done on an annual basis."
"The solution is affordable."
"I would rate Coverity's pricing as a nine out of ten. It's already very expensive, and it's a problem for us to get more licenses due to the price. The pricing model has some good aspects - for example, a personal license gives access to all languages without code limitations, which is better than some competitors. However, it's still a lot of money for us to spend."
"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"Offers varying prices for different companies"
"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"This is open source."
"We are using the open-source community version, but there are enterprise licenses available."
"It's an open-source product."
"SonarQube is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
"The product’s price is lower than Veracode’s price."
"We use the solution free of cost."
"We are using the free, unlicensed version."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
862,624 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
32%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
4%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What alternatives are there for Fortify WebInspect and Fortify SCA?
I would like to recommend Checkmarx. With Checkmarx, you are able to have an all in one solution for SAST and SCA as ...
What do you like most about Checkmarx?
Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Checkmarx?
The pricing is relatively expensive due to the product's quality and performance, but it is worth it.
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 securi...
What do you like most about Coverity?
The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.
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 ...
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. Son...
How does Snyk compare with SonarQube?
Snyk does a great job identifying and reducing vulnerabilities. This solution is fully automated and monitors 24/7 to...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Synopsys Static Analysis
Sonar
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: July 2025.
862,624 professionals have used our research since 2012.