We performed a comparison between Coverity and Fortify Software Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is its software security feature called the Checker. If you share some vulnerability or weakness then the software can find any potential security bug or defect. The code integration tool enables some secure coding standards and implements some Checkers for Live Duo. So we can enable secure coding and Azure in this tool. So in our software, we can make sure our software combines some industry supervised data."
"We were very comfortable with the initial setup."
"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"I encountered a bug with Coverity, and I opened a ticket. Support provided me with a workaround. So it's working at the moment, or at least it seems to be."
"It has the lowest false positives."
"It's very stable."
"The most valuable feature is that there were not a whole lot of false positives, at least on the codebases that I looked at."
"This is a stable solution at the end of the day."
"The reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."
"You can easily download the tool's rule packs and update them."
"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."
"Some features are not performing well, like duplicate detection and switch case situations."
"The product lacks sufficient customization options."
"SCM integration is very poor in Coverity."
"We'd like it to be faster."
"The setup takes very long."
"Reporting engine needs to be more robust."
"The level of vulnerability that this solution covers could be improved compared to other open source tools."
"We are having issues with false positives that need to be resolved."
"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."
"This solution is difficult to implement, and it should be made more comfortable for the end-users."
More Fortify Software Security Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Coverity is ranked 4th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 33 reviews while Fortify Software Security Center is ranked 27th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 3 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.8, while Fortify Software Security Center is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortify Software Security Center writes "A fair-priced solution that helps with application security testing ". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Veracode, whereas Fortify Software Security Center is most compared with Fortify on Demand, Tricentis Tosca, Checkmarx One and Fortify WebInspect. See our Coverity vs. Fortify Software Security Center report.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
