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

Coverity Static vs Onapsis 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) (5th)
Onapsis
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (36th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Coverity Static and Onapsis 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 3.0%, down 8.0% compared to last year.
Onapsis, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 0.9% mindshare, up 0.2% since last year.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Coverity Static3.0%
SonarQube15.3%
Checkmarx One9.7%
Other72.0%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Onapsis0.9%
SonarQube13.6%
Checkmarx One8.8%
Other76.7%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

KT
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.
it_user19113 - PeerSpot reviewer
SAP Security Consulting Engineer at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
It checks for and reports vulnerabilities on all SAP systems at the OS, DB and SAP levels.
I really love how Onapsis X1 is able to check SAP for threats; the reporting was something I felt could be improved. It could be a little easier to use and to publish for consumption with a larger audience. Currently, it takes some background jobs and additional work to get them published. It was difficult to get interactive reports to the different levels of the business. I would have to download them and send them out, or save them on my SharePoint site and send out a weekly link. In the version of the product I was usingת I had to log into the X1 system directly to get to the reports. Reporting would be used by several different areas of the organizationת many of whom would be at the director and executive levels. It would not make sense to have them log directly into the tool to look at these reports. Add to this that there was only one ID that could be used to log in and view the reports. To solve this problemת I had to run all of the different reports; executive summary down to detailed analysis and then export them out to my security team SharePoint site. To automate this processת a batch script was created to run after the X1 analyzed the systems. The script would pull the reports and place them in the SharePoint site automatically, but it was a bit of a hassle to get set up.

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."
"It help us identify the latest security vulnerabilities."
"One of the most valuable features is Contributing Events. That particular feature helps the developer understand the root cause of a defect. So you can locate the starting point of the defect and figure out exactly how it is being exploited."
"Provides software security, and helps to find potential security bugs or defects."
"This product has definitely helped our organization, and based on what I have heard from the development team, they have found a lot of issues before code goes into production."
"We were very comfortable with the initial setup."
"The features I find most valuable is that our entire company can publish the analysis results into our central space."
"Coverity gives advisory and deviation features, which are some of the parts I liked."
"It has hardened our SAP system by providing details of vulnerabilities in our SAP landscape."
 

Cons

"Coverity could improve the ease of use. Sometimes things become difficult and you need to follow the guides from the website but the guides could be better."
"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."
"Its price can be improved. Price is always an issue with Synopsys."
"Coverity's UI is the one thing that needs improvement."
"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."
"They could improve the usability. For example, how you set things up, even though it's straightforward, it could still be easier."
"Coverity is too costly, which is why we are trying other tools."
"My personal opinion is that the webpage of the last version of Coverity is not very easy to use."
"Reporting was something I felt could be improved. It could be a little easier to use and to publish for consumption with a larger audience."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 solution's pricing is comparable to other products."
"Coverity’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."
"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."
"Coverity is very expensive."
"The solution is affordable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
30%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
4%
Energy/Utilities Company
16%
University
13%
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

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

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
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Sony, US Army, Westinghouse, AXA. Galicia, Daimler, Roche, Levi's, Siemens, ABB, KPMG, Mercardo Libre, Verizon, Bacardi, Adgas, Sicpa, Whirlpool, Leaseplan
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: April 2026.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.