CodeSonar vs Coverity Static comparison

The compared CodeSecure and Black Duck solutions aren't in the same category. CodeSecure is ranked #29 in AS , and holds a 1.2% mindshare in the category. Black Duck is ranked #6 in SAST , with an average rating of 7.8, and holds a 3.3% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of CodeSecure users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of Black Duck users who would recommend it.

CodeSonar

Read 7 CodeSonar reviews

2,951 Views
2,066 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Coverity Static

Read 43 Coverity Static reviews

9,914 Views
8,030 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

CodeSonar

Coverity Static

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between CodeSonar and Coverity Static based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Application Security Tools Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 889,855 peers since 2012

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

CodeSonar

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (29th), Static Code Analysis (10th)

Coverity Static

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (6th)

Mindshare comparison

CodeSonar and Coverity Static aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. CodeSonar is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.2%, down 1.4% compared to last year.
Coverity Static, on the other hand, focuses on Static Application Security Testing (SAST), holds 3.3% mindshare, down 8.1% since last year.

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
CodeSonar	1.2%
SonarQube	14.5%
Checkmarx One	9.2%
Other	75.1%

Application Security Tools

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Coverity Static	3.3%
SonarQube	16.3%
Checkmarx One	10.1%
Other	70.3%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Mathieu ALBRESPY

Intigration Developer at ez-Wheel

Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand

This is the first time I've used this kind of software. It was the only one we could apply to analyze with MISRA rules. At my new company, I tried to use Klocwork. I tried to use it, just once so I cannot compare it exactly with CodeSonar. I also have a plugin for my Visual Studio and I try to make it work. It's not easy, however, I don't think that we have this kind of functionality with CodeSonar. It can do some incremental analysis. However, since this feature is also available on CodeSonar, it would be a good idea to have a plugin on Visual Studio just to have a quick analysis.

Read full review

Kasiraja Thangapandian

Software Engineering Manager at Visteon Corporation

Using tools for compliance is beneficial but cost concerns persist

We have been using Coverity for quite a long period. It has been fine for our needs. I would rate Coverity between eight to nine, though the cost is high. I would rate their support from Coverity as six. That is the main complaint, but we still appreciate having it.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."

"I would suggest trying out automated tools along with CodeSonar on your project, and you will find out that CodeSonar reports many more defects compared to other static analysis tools, so this is a very important tool."

"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times."

"It has helped us a lot with some issues and has helped us avoid bad code."

"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."

"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."

"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code."

"It has been able to scale."

More CodeSonar pros

"It help us identify the latest security vulnerabilities."

"The tool as it is can be used for code quality improvement."

"The most valuable feature of Coverity is its software security feature called the Checker. If you share some vulnerability or weakness then the software can find any potential security bug or defect. The code integration tool enables some secure coding standards and implements some Checkers for Live Duo. So we can enable secure coding and Azure in this tool. So in our software, we can make sure our software combines some industry supervised data."

"The most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."

"In my opinion, the most effective Coverity feature for identifying critical vulnerabilities is the extra checks, which offers deep analysis."

"I encountered a bug with Coverity, and I opened a ticket; support provided me with a workaround, so it's working at the moment, or at least it seems to be."

"If you have enough budget, it is one of the best solutions right now."

"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."

More Coverity Static pros

Cons

"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."

"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."

"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."

"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."

"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."

"The MISRA guidelines were not appropriately reported and there were some flags or errors."

"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."

"It was difficult for us to apply a rule, especially to a part of the code, and not apply it to the rest of the code."

More CodeSonar cons

"Coverity concerns its dashboards and reporting."

"Ideally, it would have a user-based license that does not have a restriction in the number of lines of code."

"We're currently facing a primary challenge with automation using Coverity. Each developer has a license and can perform manual checks, and we also have a nightly build that analyzes the entire software. The main issue is that the tool can't look behind submodules in our code base, so it doesn't see changes stored there."

"Their technical support isn't so good. That needs improvement. They don't address the problems I bring up. It's not a priority for them."

"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."

"It is an expensive solution. Their sales team is very arrogant."

"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 tool needs to improve its reporting."

More Coverity Static cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is a bit costly."

"The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools."

"The solution's price depends on the number of licenses needed and the source code for the project."

"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."

"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."

"Depending on the usage types, one has to opt for different types of licenses from Coverity, especially to be able to use areas like report viewing or report generation."

"The price is competitive with other solutions."

"Offers varying prices for different companies"

"The solution's pricing is comparable to other products."

"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."

"Coverity is very expensive."

"Coverity is quite expensive."

More Coverity Static pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

889,855 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

24%

Computer Software Company

University

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

30%

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	2

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	31

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?

I do not know about the pricing.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Coverity?

The price is a concern, and there are a lot of false positives coming through. Support with Coverity is adequate, but they take a longer time to respond. The core support is not straightforward, an...

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs CodeSonar

Compared 18% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs CodeSonar

Compared 7% of the time

Veracode vs CodeSonar

Compared 6% of the time

Helix QAC vs CodeSonar

Compared 4% of the time

Jscrambler vs CodeSonar

Compared 4% of the time

More CodeSonar Competitors

SonarQube vs Coverity Static

Compared 20% of the time

Klocwork vs Coverity Static

Compared 7% of the time

Veracode vs Coverity Static

Compared 6% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs Coverity Static

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Coverity Static

Compared 5% of the time

More Coverity Static Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

April 2026

Download CodeSonar product report

Buyer's Guide

Coverity Static

April 2026

Download Coverity Static product report

Also Known As

No data available

Synopsys Static Analysis

Overview

GrammaTech enables organizations to develop software applications more efficiently, on-budget, and on-schedule by helping to eliminate harmful defects that can cause system failures, enable data breaches, and ultimately increase corporate liabilities in today’s connected world. GrammaTech is the developer of CodeSonar, the most powerful source and binary code analysis solution available today. Extraordinarily precise, CodeSonar finds, on average, 2 times more serious defects in software than other static analysis solutions. Designed for organizations with zero tolerance for defects and vulnerabilities in their applications, CodeSonar provides static analysis for applications where reliability and security are paramount - widely used by software developers in avionics, medical, automotive, industrial control, and other mission-critical applications. Some of GrammaTech's customers include Toyota, GE, Hyundai, Kawasaki, LG, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Northrop Grumman, Panasonic, and Samsung.

CodeSecure

Coverity gives you the speed, ease of use, accuracy, industry standards compliance, and scalability that you need to develop high-quality, secure applications. Coverity identifies critical software quality defects and security vulnerabilities in code as it’s written, early in the development process, when it’s least costly and easiest to fix. With the Code Sight integrated development environment (IDE) plugin, developers get accurate analysis in seconds in their IDE as they code. Precise actionable remediation advice and context-specific eLearning help your developers understand how to fix their prioritized issues quickly, without having to become security experts.

Coverity seamlessly integrates automated security testing into your CI/CD pipelines and supports your existing development tools and workflows. Choose where and how to do your development: on-premises or in the cloud with the Polaris Software Integrity Platform (SaaS), a highly scalable, cloud-based application security platform. Coverity supports more than 20 languages and 200 frameworks and templates.

Black Duck

Sample Customers

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

April 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

889,855 professionals have used our research since 2012.

We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.