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

Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) vs Coverity Static 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

Continuous Dynamic (formerl...
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (12th)
Coverity Static
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) is designed for Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) and holds a mindshare of 4.3%, up 2.6% compared to last year.
Coverity Static, on the other hand, focuses on Static Application Security Testing (SAST), holds 2.8% mindshare, down 8.0% since last year.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic)4.3%
Veracode14.8%
Checkmarx One14.4%
Other66.5%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Coverity Static2.8%
SonarQube14.5%
Checkmarx One9.2%
Other73.5%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

it_user245412 - PeerSpot reviewer
Executive Vice President, Operations at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
The product and customer service is extremely efficient but I would like to see more research and code examples.
* The continuous online scanning capabilities and reporting features. * The SaaS product features accessible from a browser make managing our online systems easy. * The ability to review security items quickly along with being able to retest vulnerabilities on our schedule make the Sentinel product an invaluable tool for our company’s product security requirements.
BL
Software Quality Expert at Endress+Hauser AG
Useful for extra checks but not recommended for C++
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. This limitation means it can't detect changes accurately, forcing us to analyze all files instead of just the modified ones. It struggles with repositories organized with different submodules. Although documentation suggests it's possible to configure Coverity to handle this, it requires effort. The solution's analysis tools are high-quality, but the web design could improve. For example, the data is organized into pages when there are many findings, such as ten thousand lines of information. Each page shows about a hundred items, and navigating through these pages (from items 100 to 200, 200 to 300, and so on) can be cumbersome. I've heard from a colleague about another Synopsys tool with a very good GUI. It might be a solution for us to include with Coverity. We invested in Coverity, but compared to SonarQube, it lacks a good interface. SonarQube has a responsive, intuitive GUI, but its analysis quality isn't as good as Coverity's. Coverity's interface isn't great, but its analysis is much better. We hope Synopsys will improve Coverity because it doesn't make a good impression when you first use it. We started with the command line and saw the results were very good. We moved from another tool with a slightly better GUI, but it crashed often, so Coverity was an improvement. When I used the solution earlier, I noticed some issues. It supports C++, which we use, but there's room for improvement. Coverity has two plug-ins. The newer one works well for languages like C# or Java and is very responsive. When we evaluated it with Synopsys, they presented it as easy to configure and install. However, C++ slows down significantly because it's analyzing in the background. It's not very responsive when typing, likely due to the many included files in C++ that need analysis. It's not as quick as with C# or other languages, where you get immediate feedback from Coverity. The classic plug-in is still supported but old-fashioned. It has a manual option, but I haven't checked it. The main problem for C++ users who prefer the old plug-in is responsiveness.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The SaaS product features accessible from a browser make managing our online systems easy."
"If they have a cluster structure, then definitely they should use Coverity."
"The product has deeper scanning capabilities."
"The solution has improved our code quality and security very well."
"It's very stable."
"The ability to scan code gives us details of existing and potential vulnerabilities. What really matters for us is to ensure that we are able to catch vulnerabilities ahead of time."
"We were very comfortable with the initial setup."
"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."
"It help us identify the latest security vulnerabilities."
 

Cons

"I would like to see more research and code examples for the vulnerabilities identified to better assist us with our remediation process."
"I had tried integrating the tool with Azure DevOps, but the report I got stated that my team faced many challenges."
"The setup takes very long."
"Coverity's implementation cycle is very slow when integrating changes, especially for problems related to event handling and memory leaks."
"Coverity is not a user-friendly product."
"It would be great if we could customize the rules to focus on critical issues."
"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."
"Sometimes it's a bit hard to figure out how to use the product’s UI."
"The tool needs to improve its reporting."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution's pricing is comparable to other products."
"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."
"Coverity is quite expensive."
"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
899,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Healthcare Company
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Performing Arts
6%
Manufacturing Company
30%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
 

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...
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...
 

Also Known As

Sentinel Dynamic, WhiteHat Security Application Security Testing, Synopsys WhiteHat Dynamic
Synopsys Static Analysis
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, Checkmarx, OpenText and others in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). Updated: June 2026.
899,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.