Coverity vs GitGuardian Platform comparison

Black Duck and GitGuardian are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Black Duck is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while GitGuardian is ranked #5 with an average rating of 9.0. Black Duck holds a 7.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to GitGuardian’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Black Duck users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of GitGuardian users who would recommend it.

Coverity

Read 42 Coverity reviews

11,969 Views
8,281 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

GitGuardian Platform

Read 24 GitGuardian Platform reviews

1,991 Views
349 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Coverity

GitGuardian Platform

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Coverity and GitGuardian Platform compete in the software security analysis category. GitGuardian Platform seems to have the upper hand due to innovative features and user satisfaction with its value, despite Coverity's favorable reviews in specific areas like pricing and support.

Features: Coverity is noted for its accuracy in defect detection, scalability for large codebases, and efficient handling of extensive projects. GitGuardian Platform offers robust secret detection, excellent integration capabilities, and comprehensive security features that align with future demands.

Room for Improvement: Coverity could improve speed, usability, and scan times. GitGuardian Platform should enhance false-positive management, provide more detailed documentation, and refine some functionalities based on user feedback.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Coverity is recognized for a straightforward deployment process and responsive support leading to a positive user experience. GitGuardian Platform provides a flexible deployment model with extensive support, resulting in seamless implementation and fast issue resolution.

Pricing and ROI: Coverity receives positive feedback for its cost-effectiveness and ROI, with users noting a transparent pricing structure. GitGuardian Platform requires a higher initial setup cost but offers substantial ROI through enhanced security features, making the investment worthwhile.

To learn more, read our detailed Coverity vs. GitGuardian Platform Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Coverity vs. GitGuardian Platform

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 850,028 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

4th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

GitGuardian Platform

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

5th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (7th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (6th), Software Supply Chain Security (4th), DevSecOps (4th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 7.5%, up from 6.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GitGuardian Platform is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Md. Shahriar Hussain

Information Security Analyst at Banglalink

Offers impressive reporting features with user-friendliness and high scalability

The solution can be easily setup but requires heavy integration due to the multiple types of port and programming languages involved. Comparing the resource requirements of the solution I would say it can be installed effortlessly. I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. A professional needs some pre-acquired knowledge to manage Coverity's deployment process, but the local solution partners provide support well enough for trouble-free deployment. The overall deployment process of Coverity took around two and a half hours in our organization. The deployment duration depends upon the operating system and resources including high-end RAM and CPU processors.

Read full review

Joan Ging

Head of Development at Inhabit

It dramatically improved our ability to detect secrets, saved us time, and reduced our mean time to remediation

While they do offer some basic reporting, more comprehensive reporting would be beneficial in the long run. This would allow me to demonstrate the value of the product over time to continue to effectively budget for this subscription, especially as they add features that may come at an additional cost. I appreciate the improvements made to reporting over the past year, but continued development in this area will be appreciated. We have encountered occasional difficulties with the Single Sign-On process. There is room for improvement in its current implementation. It works, but was not quite as smooth as the rest of the GitGuardian experience.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's very stable."

"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 is a scalable solution."

"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."

"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."

"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. Additionally, it is a powerful capabilities solution."

"The product has deeper scanning capabilities."

"It provides reports about a lot of potential defects."

More Coverity pros

"The entire GitGuardian solution is valuable. The product is doing its job and showing us many things. We get many false positives, but the ability to automatically display potential leaks when developers commit is valuable. The dashboards show you recent and historical commits, and we have a full scan that shows historical leaked secrets."

"The most valuable feature of GitGuardian is that it finds tokens and passwords. That's why we need this tool. It minimizes the possibility of security violations that we cannot find on our own."

"The most valuable feature is the alerts when secrets are leaked and we can look at particular repositories to see if there are any outstanding problems. In addition, the solution's detection capabilities seem very broad. We have no concerns there."

"GitGuardian has also helped us develop a security-minded culture. We're serious about shift left and getting better about code security. I think a lot of people are getting more mindful about what a secret is."

"There is quite a lot to like. Its user interface is fantastic, and being able to sort the incidents by whether they are valid or for a certain repository or a certain user has been very beneficial in helping investigate what has been found."

"The secrets detection and alerting is the most important feature. We get alerted almost immediately after someone commits a secret. It has been very accurate, allowing us to jump on it right away, then figure out if we have something substantial that has been leaked or whether it is something that we don't have to worry about. This general main feature of the app is great."

"The most valuable feature is the general incident reporting system."

"The most valuable feature is its ability to automate both downloading the repository and generating a Software Bill of Materials directly from it."

More GitGuardian Platform pros

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."

"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."

"The setup takes very long."

"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."

"Reporting engine needs to be more robust."

"Coverity is not stable."

"Its price can be improved. Price is always an issue with Synopsys."

"Sometimes it's a bit hard to figure out how to use the product’s UI."

More Coverity cons

"We have been somewhat confused by the dashboard at times."

"The purchasing process is convoluted compared to Snyk, the other tool we use. It's like night and day because you only need to punch in your credit card, and you're set. With GitGuardian, getting a quote took two or three weeks. We paid for it in December but have not settled that payment yet."

"GitGuardian could have more detailed information on what software engineers can do. It only provides some highly generic feedback when a secret is detected. They should have outside documentation. We send this to our software engineers, who are still doing the commits. It's the wrong way to work, but they are accustomed to doing it this way. When they go into that ticket, they see a few instructions that might be confusing. If I see a leaked secret committed two years ago, it's not enough to undo that commit. I need to go in there, change all my code to utilize GitHub secrets, and go on AWS to validate my key."

"I would like to see more fine-grained access controls when tickets are assigned for incidents. I would like the ability to provide more controls to the team leads or the product managers so that they can drive what we, the AppSec team, are doing."

"For some repositories, there are a lot of incidents. For example, one repository says 255 occurrences, so I assume these are 255 alerts and nobody is doing anything about them. These could be false positives. However, I cannot assess it correctly, because I haven't been closing these false positives myself. From the dashboard, I can see that for some of the repositories, there have been a lot of closing of these occurrences, so I would assume there are a lot of false positives. A ballpark estimate would be 60% being false positives. One of the arguments from the developers against this tool is the number of false positives."

"GitGuardian's hook and dashboard scanners are the two entities. They should work together as one. We've seen several discrepancies where the hook is not being flagged on the dashboard. I still think they need to do some fine-tuning around that. We don't want to waste time."

"It would be nice if they supported detecting PII or had some kind of data loss prevention feature."

"There is room for improvement in its integration for bug-tracking. It should be more direct. They have invested a lot in user management, but they need to invest in integrations. That is a real lack."

More GitGuardian Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."

"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."

"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."

"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 is affordable."

"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."

"Coverity’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."

More Coverity pricing and cost advice

"The pricing for GitGuardian is fair."

"With GitGuardian, we didn't need any middlemen."

"We don't have a huge number of users, but its yearly rate was quite reasonable when compared to other per-seat solutions that we looked at... Having a free plan for a small number of users was really great. If you're a small team, I don't see why you wouldn't want to get started with it."

"I compared the solution to a couple of other solutions, and I think it is very competitively priced."

"It could be cheaper. When GitHub secrets monitoring solution goes to general access and general availability, GitGuardian might be in a little bit of trouble from the competition, and maybe then they might lower their prices. The GitGuardian solution is great. I'm just concerned that they're not GitHub."

"You get what you pay for. It's one of the more expensive solutions, but it is very good, and the low false positive rate is a really appealing factor."

"The internal side is cheap per user. It is annual pricing based on the number of users."

"I am only aware of the base price. I do not know what happened with our purchasing team in discussions with GitGuardian. I was not privy to the overall contract, but in terms of the base MSRP price, I found it reasonable."

More GitGuardian Platform pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

33%

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Computer Software Company

22%

Government

13%

Media Company

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Coverity?

The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?

I do not know about the pricing.

See all answers

What do you like most about GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?

It's also worth mentioning that GitGuardian is unique because they have a free tier that we've been using for the first twelve months. It provides full functionality for smaller teams. We're a smal...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?

The pricing for GitGuardian is fair.

See all answers

What needs improvement with GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?

We'd like to request a new GitGuardian feature that automates user onboarding and access control for code repositories. Ideally, when a user contributes to a repository, they would be automatically...

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity

Compared 50% of the time

Klocwork vs Coverity

Compared 7% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Veracode vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

More Coverity Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 28% of the time

Snyk vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 17% of the time

GitGuardian Public Monitoring vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 16% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 15% of the time

Cycode vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 9% of the time

More GitGuardian Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Coverity

May 2025

Download Coverity product report

Buyer's Guide

GitGuardian Platform

April 2025

Download GitGuardian Platform product report

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis

GitGuardian Internal Monitoring

Overview

Coverity gives you the speed, ease of use, accuracy, industry standards compliance, and scalability that you need to develop high-quality, secure applications. Coverity identifies critical software quality defects and security vulnerabilities in code as it’s written, early in the development process, when it’s least costly and easiest to fix. With the Code Sight integrated development environment (IDE) plugin, developers get accurate analysis in seconds in their IDE as they code. Precise actionable remediation advice and context-specific eLearning help your developers understand how to fix their prioritized issues quickly, without having to become security experts.

Coverity seamlessly integrates automated security testing into your CI/CD pipelines and supports your existing development tools and workflows. Choose where and how to do your development: on-premises or in the cloud with the Polaris Software Integrity Platform (SaaS), a highly scalable, cloud-based application security platform. Coverity supports more than 20 languages and 200 frameworks and templates.

Black Duck

GitGuardian helps organizations detect and fix vulnerabilities in source code at every step of the software development lifecycle. With GitGuardian’s policy engine, security teams can monitor and enforce rules across their VCS, DevOps tools, and infrastructure-as-code configurations.

Widely adopted by developer communities, GitGuardian is used by more than 500,000 developers and is the #1 app in the security category on the GitHub Marketplace. GitGuardian is also trusted by leading companies, including Instacart, Genesys, Orange, Iress, Beyond Identity, NOW: Pensions, and Stedi.

GitGuardian Platform includes automated secrets detection and remediation. By reducing the risks of secrets exposure across the SDLC, GitGuardian helps software-driven organizations strengthen their security posture and comply with frameworks and standards.

Its detection engine is trained against more than a billion public GitHub commits every year, and it covers 350+ types of secrets such as API keys, database connection strings, private keys, certificates, and more.

GitGuardian brings security and development teams together with automated remediation playbooks and collaboration features to resolve incidents fast and in full. By pulling developers closer to the remediation process, organizations can achieve higher incident closing rates and shorter fix times.

The platform integrates across the DevOps toolchain, including native support for continuously scanning VCS platforms like GitHub, Gitlab, Azure DevOps and Bitbucket or CI/CD tools like Jenkins, CircleCI, Travis CI, GitLab pipelines, and many more. It also integrates with ticketing and messaging systems like Splunk, PagerDuty, Jira and Slack to support teams with their incident remediation workflows. GitGuardian is offered as a SaaS platform but can also be hosted on-premise for organizations operating in highly regulated industries or with strict data privacy requirements.

GitGuardian

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space

Automox, 66degrees (ex Cloudbakers), Iress, Now:Pensions, Payfit, Orange, BouyguesTelecom, Seequent, Stedi, Talend, Snowflake...

Buyer's Guide

Coverity vs. GitGuardian Platform

April 2025

Free Report: Coverity vs. GitGuardian Platform

Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. GitGuardian Platform and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Coverity vs. GitGuardian Platform 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.