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

Coverity Static vs OpenText Core Application Security vs SonarQube 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity Static is 3.8%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.0%, down from 4.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube is 17.7%, down from 25.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SonarQube17.7%
Coverity Static3.8%
OpenText Core Application Security3.0%
Other75.5%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

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.
Himanshu_Tyagi - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
Supports secure development pipelines and improves issue detection but limits internal visibility and needs broader dashboard integration
If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. That was the only reason we migrated from Fortify on Demand to another solution. Fortify has another tool which is Fortify WebInspect. On Demand is the outsourcing solution, and WebInspect you can use with your in-house team, which is basically the product developed by the Fortify team. For automated scanning, Fortify helps a lot. Regarding the visibility for the internal team, everyone is moving toward the DevSecOps side, and Fortify team has made good progress that you can integrate into your CICD pipeline. One thing I would highlight is if Fortify can focus more on the centralized dashboard of the tools because nowadays, tools such as SentinelOne also exist for identifying security issues, but they have a centralized dashboard that merges their cloud solution and application security side solution together. If you have one tool that works for different solutions, it helps a lot. They are doing good, but they should invest more on the AI side as well because AI security is evolving these days. On the cloud side, they have already made good progress, but I believe they should explore the new area related to AI security as well.
KH
Sr Software Engineering Supervisor at Mozarc Medical
Gains control over rule customization and achieves reliable vulnerability assessment
The deployment process took me about 2 or 3 hours to deploy SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube), although I do not remember exactly since it was done about 2 years back. Currently, about 10 of my developers are using SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) in my company. I do not have plans to increase the usage of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) in the future as there will not be any requirement to increase. I am a senior software engineer and supervisor at Mozark Medical. My corporate email address is karthik.k.a.r.t.h.i.k.h.a.r.p.a.n.h.a.l.l.i@mozarkmedical.com. Overall, I would rate SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) as a 9 out of 10.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The tool as it is can be used for code quality improvement."
"We were very comfortable with the initial setup."
"The solution has improved our code quality and security very well."
"The features I find most valuable is that our entire company can publish the analysis results into our central space."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is the wrapper; we use the wrapper to build the C++ component, then we use the other code analysis to analyze the code to the build object, and then send back the result to the SonarQube server."
"Provides software security, and helps to find potential security bugs or defects."
"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."
"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."
"The UL is easy to use compared to that of other tools, and it is highly reliable. The findings provide a lower number of false positives."
"What stands out to me is the user-friendliness of each feature."
"It's a stable and scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the capacity to be able to check vulnerabilities during the development process. The development team can check whether the code they are using is vulnerable to some type of attack or there is some type of vulnerability so that they can mitigate it. It helps us in achieving a more secure approach towards internal applications. It is an intuitive solution. It gives all the information that a developer needs to remediate a vulnerability in the coding process. It also gives you some examples of how to remediate a vulnerability in different programming languages. This solution is pretty much what we were searching for."
"The most valuable features are the detailed reporting and the ability to set up deep scanning of the software, both of which are in the same place."
"The user interface is good."
"Its ability to perform different types of scans, keep everything in one place, and track the triage process in Fortify SSC stands out."
"The most valuable feature is that it connects with your development platforms, such as Microsoft Information Server and Jira."
"SonarQube's unit test coverage and exhaustive information at the module, project, and overall code repo levels are quite good."
"The solution has helped us mitigate problems in applications before they were a bigger issue."
"SonarQube is designed well making it easy to use, simple to identify issues and find solutions to problems."
"The most valuable features are the segregation containment and the suspension of product services."
"We can create a Quality Gate in order to fail Jenkins jobs where the code coverage is lower than the set percentage."
"Apart from the security point of view, I like that it makes it easy to detect code smells and other issues in terms of code quality and standards."
"One of the most valuable features of SonarQube is its ability to detect code quality during development."
"This solution has evolved a lot in the last ten years and it comes with good DevOps implementation and security, which is a big problem today."
 

Cons

"There is an extra step in my organization that involves uploading to servers, which adds overhead."
"The product should include more customization options. The analytics is not as deep as compared to SonarQube."
"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 price is a concern, and there are a lot of false positives coming through."
"There should be additional IDE support."
"This is a pretty expensive solution. The overall value of the solution could be improved if the price was reduced."
"The solution could use more rules."
"It should be easier to specify your own validation routines and sanitation routines."
"Micro Focus support is slow, and they should improve that."
"The product has a lot of false positives."
"This solution would be improved if the code-quality perspective were added to it, on top of the security aspect."
"I know OpenText is developing Aviator, similar to ChatGPT, with LLM inside the OpenText Core Application Security environment. However, I understand they do not have it for the on-premises environment."
"The UI could be better. Fortify should also suggest new packages in the product that can be upgraded. Currently, it shows that, but it's not visible enough. In future versions, I would like more insights about the types of vulnerabilities and the pages associated with the exact CVE."
"In terms of what could be improved, we need more strategic analysis reports, not just for one specific application, but for the whole enterprise. In the next release, we need more reports and more analytic views for all the applications. There is no enterprise view in Fortify. I would like enterprise views and reports."
"When we sent a question about the product to their support team, we had to wait a while but they did send us a response eventually."
"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"I find it is light on the security side."
"The solution has a very shallow SAST scanning; that is something that can be improved."
"It's a bit expensive for us. The currency rate of the dollar is a problem but it may be fine for other countries."
"The tool needs to be more compatible with C/C++ language"
"The handling of the contents of Docker container images could be better."
"During the setup process, we only had one issue related to the number of available files. To perform the analysis, you have quite a lot of available file handles, so we had to increase that limit."
"We had some issues scanning the master branch but when we upgraded to version 7.9 we noticed it does scan the master branch but we had to do a workaround for it to happen. This process could be improved in a future release."
"The installation of the framework was a bit difficult, it could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."
"Coverity is quite expensive."
"It is expensive."
"Offers varying prices for different companies"
"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."
"The tool was fairly priced."
"The tool's price is somewhere in the middle. It's neither cheap nor expensive. I would rate the pricing a five out of ten."
"The pricing model it's based on how many applications you wish to scan."
"It's a yearly contract, but I don't remember the dollar amount."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."
"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."
"It is not more expensive than other solutions, but the pricing is competitive."
"The pricing can be improved because it is complex when compared to the competition."
"Despite being on the higher end in terms of cost, the biggest value lies in its abilities, including robust features, seamless integration, and high-quality findings."
"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."
"The development license cost is reasonable, and we've had no concerns about SonarQube when it comes to cost."
"It's an open-source solution, with no additional costs."
"The price of this solution is more expensive than competitors. However, it works better than competitors."
"We are using the open-source version, which is available free of cost."
"The developer edition is based on cost per lines of code."
"The price point on SonarQube is good."
"The tool's pricing is reasonable."
"The beauty of this solution is the free open-source version is capable enough in doing pretty much what an enterprise-level version can do."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
885,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
31%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
4%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
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 Business18
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise45
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business42
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise79
 

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 securi...
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
In comparison with other tools, they're competitive. It is not more expensive than other solutions, but their pricing...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whet...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
I have been working with AWS cloud for the past six to seven years, and in my current role, I am working on AWS cloud...
Is SonarQube the best tool for static analysis?
I am not very familiar with SonarQube and their solutions, so I can not answer. But if you are asking me about which ...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. Son...
How does Snyk compare with SonarQube?
Snyk does a great job identifying and reducing vulnerabilities. This solution is fully automated and monitors 24/7 to...
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
Sonar, SonarQube Cloud
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Snowflake, Booking.com, Deutsche Bank, AstraZeneca, and Ford Motor Company.
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: March 2026.
885,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.