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

CodeSonar vs HCL AppScan comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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
Ranking in Application Security Tools
28th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Static Code Analysis (11th)
HCL AppScan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
20th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (17th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of CodeSonar is 1.2%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HCL AppScan is 2.3%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
HCL AppScan2.3%
CodeSonar1.2%
Other96.5%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Mathieu ALBRESPY - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Ravi Khanchandani - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder Director at Techsa Services
Has improved identification of encryption and authentication issues across cloud and on-prem applications
During the learning curve of onboarding HCL AppScan, we learned that HCL has altered the portfolio and now offers HCL AppScan 360, which has a much better look and feel with an improved user interface. However, there is one feature called SCA, which stands for Software Composition Analysis, that could be improved. When I'm doing an application scan, HCL AppScan has the ability to generate information about what components are in use. For example, if I'm scanning a web application, it shows me the various components being used. It tells me whether I have Java libraries, .NET frameworks, or other log management libraries such as Log4j, and what versions of those specific components are present. I would like to see more detailed reports from the tool. Currently, you can find out the components belonging to a specific software, but if detailed reporting became available, you would be in a better position to identify vulnerabilities. For instance, I could identify that I had the Log4j vulnerability and know that I need to fix my application accordingly. If they add the features I'm describing, I would consider giving them a higher rating. However, I've only been experienced with the product for three months.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."
"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."
"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."
"It has been able to scale."
"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."
"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."
"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."
"We are now deploying less defects to production."
"It was easy to set up."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Postman."
"AppScan's most valuable features include its ability to identify vulnerabilities accurately, provide detailed remediation steps, and the newly introduced AI-powered features that enhance its functionality further."
"The product is useful, particularly in its sensitivity and scanning capabilities."
"There's extensive functionality with custom rules and a custom knowledge base."
"I like the recording feature."
"The reporting part is the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."
"It was expensive."
"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."
"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."
"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."
"I would like to see the roadmap for this product. We are still waiting to see it as we have only so many resources."
"I think being able to search across more containers, especially some of the docker elements. We need a little tighter integration there. That's the only thing I can see at this point."
"We have experienced challenges when trying to integrate this solution with other products. When you compare it with the other SecOps products, the quality of the output is too low. It is not a new-age product. It is very outdated."
"The tool should improve its output. Scanning is not a challenge anymore since there are many such tools available in the market. The product needs to focus on how its output is being used by end users. It should be also more user-friendly. One of the major challenges is in the tool's integration with applications that need to be scanned. Sometimes, the scanning is not proper."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"AppScan is too complicated and should be made more user-friendly."
"They could incorporate AI to enhance vulnerability detection and improve the product's reporting capabilities."
"The dashboard, for AppScan or the Fortified fast tool, which we use needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."
"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."
"Pricing is a bit costly."
"The tool was expensive."
"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."
"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."
"The solution is moderately priced."
"HCL AppScan is expensive."
"Pricing was the main reason that we went ahead with this solution as they were the lowest in the market."
"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."
"I rate the product's price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high. HCL AppScan is an expensive tool."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
879,853 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
25%
University
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about HCL AppScan?
The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase.
What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?
During the learning curve of onboarding HCL AppScan, we learned that HCL has altered the portfolio and now offers HCL AppScan 360, which has a much better look and feel with an improved user interf...
What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?
I'm currently working with BigFix and HCL AppScan. At least three people in my company are using HCL AppScan. Since we are a reseller, we run it in both lab environments and live production applica...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY
Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
Find out what your peers are saying about CodeSonar vs. HCL AppScan and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,853 professionals have used our research since 2012.