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

Coverity Static vs Fortify Application Defender 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

Coverity Static
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (12th)
Fortify Application Defender
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (34th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Coverity Static and Fortify Application Defender aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Coverity Static is designed for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and holds a mindshare of 2.5%, down 7.4% compared to last year.
Fortify Application Defender, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 1.5% mindshare, up 0.7% since last year.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Coverity Static2.5%
SonarQube13.3%
Checkmarx One8.8%
Other75.4%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Fortify Application Defender1.5%
SonarQube11.7%
Checkmarx One7.9%
Other78.9%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

SP
Lead Information Security at GEP Worldwide at ReBIT
Helps us identify security vulnerabilities in the development phase and provides a plugin for the developer IDE
The initial setup is good. When I use the product to scan the code in the DevOps pipeline, the issue coverage can be greater, which can help speed up risk identification in the CI/CD pipeline. That is one area where improvement can be made. Corresponding steps can be taken for that. It integrates with most of the tools, like ticketing tools, configuration tools, Jenkins, and the pipeline. That is fantastic.
VS
CTO at Abcl
Useful for fast code review in devOps pipelines
I rate the tool's scalability a seven out of ten. However, I'm concerned about how it handles an increasing number of lines of code. As the complexity grows, so does the time it takes for the tool to review everything. I want more clarity on how Fortify Application Defender handles multiple threats. We have numerous endpoints, but the tool runs in our pipeline, meaning it operates in the cloud. All our code is configured there, and the tool runs integration testing, unit testing, user testing, and final production code tests. It's a day-to-day experience. It's utilized almost every day as part of our pipeline runs. Each team responsible for integration testing, human testing, user access testing, and preproduction testing runs it whenever they take a build.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has the lowest false positives."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."
"It's pretty stable. I rate the stability of Coverity nine out of ten."
"Considering the analysis part and the benchmarking process involving the product that my company carried out, the solution is good for finding bugs and violations"
"Provides software security, and helps to find potential security bugs or defects."
"If you have enough budget, it is one of the best solutions right now."
"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."
"The solution has improved our code quality and security very well."
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."
"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy."
"The information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."
"We are able to provide out customers with a secure application after development. They are no longer left wondering if they are vulnerable to different threats within the market following deployment."
"Fortify Application Defender has a few drawbacks, it has its own pros and cons, but it's a good tool to use in any industry."
"The tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."
 

Cons

"We actually specified several checkers, but we found some checkers had a higher false positive rate. I think this is a problem. Because we have to waste some time is really the issue because the issue is not an issue. I mean, the tool pauses or an issue, but the same issue is the filter now.Some check checkers cannot find some issues, but sometimes they find issues that are not relevant, right, that are not really issues. Some customisation mechanism can be added in the next release so that we can define our Checker. The Modelling feature provided by Coverity helps in finding more information for potential issues but it is not mature enough, it should be mature. The fast testing feature for security testing campaign can be added as well. So if you correctly integrate it with the training team, maybe you can help us to find more potential issues."
"There should be additional IDE support."
"The quality of the code needs improvement."
"The setup takes very long."
"The price is a concern, and there are a lot of false positives coming through."
"The product lacks sufficient customization options."
"Coverity's UI is the one thing that needs improvement."
"We use GitHub and Gitflow, and Coverity does not fit with Gitflow. I have to create a screen for our branches, and it's a pain for developers. It has been difficult to integrate Coverity with our system."
"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."
"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and security checks. Many independent and open-source tools are available, from Apache to various libraries. Using multiple DevOps pipeline tools can slow the turnaround time."
"The licensing is very complex, it's project based and can range from $10,000 to $200,000+ depending on the project type and size."
"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."
"The false positive rate should be lower."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."
"Coverity is very expensive."
"The solution is affordable."
"The solution's pricing is comparable to other products."
"Offers varying prices for different companies"
"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."
"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."
"It is expensive."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive."
"The product’s price is much higher than other tools."
"The base licensing costs for the SaaS platform is about $900 USD per application, per year."
"The licensing is very complex, it's project based and can range from $10,000 to $200,000+ depending on the project type and size."
"Fortify Application Defender is very expensive."
"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten. It comes as an annual cloud subscription. The tool's pricing is around 50 lakhs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
911,039 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
28%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
5%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
ServiceMaster, Saltworks, SAP
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: August 2026.
911,039 professionals have used our research since 2012.