Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Coverity Static vs HCL AppScan comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 15, 2025

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
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
HCL AppScan
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (15th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity Static is 6.0%, down from 7.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HCL AppScan is 2.5%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Coverity Static6.0%
HCL AppScan2.5%
Other91.5%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Jaile Sebes - PeerSpot reviewer
Resolving critical software issues demands faster implementation and better integration
We use Coverity primarily to find issues such as software bugs and memory leaks, especially in C++ and C# projects. It helps us identify deadlocks, synchronization issues, and product crashes Coverity has been instrumental in resolving product crashes by detecting various issues like deadlocks.…
AnshulTomar - PeerSpot reviewer
Scalable platform with efficient static and dynamic testing features
We use the product for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). By integrating AppScan into our CI/CD pipelines, aligned with Agile methodologies, we ensure that security testing becomes an integral part of the software development lifecycle The…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"What I find most effective about Coverity is its low rate of false positives. I've seen other platforms with many false positives, but with Coverity, most vulnerabilities it identifies are genuine. This allows me to focus on real issues."
"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."
"The product has deeper scanning capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is that there were not a whole lot of false positives, at least on the codebases that I looked at."
"It's pretty stable. I rate the stability of Coverity nine out of ten."
"The product is easy to use."
"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The solution offers services in a few specific development languages."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The solution is cheap."
"This solution saves us time due to the low number of false positives detected."
"It has certainly helped us find vulnerabilities in our software, so this is priceless in the end."
"We use it as a security testing application."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Postman."
"The UI was very intuitive."
 

Cons

"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."
"Coverity is not stable."
"Coverity is far from perfection, and I'm not 100 percent sure it's helping me find what I need to find in my role. We need exactly what we are looking for, i.e. security errors and vulnerabilities. It doesn't seem to be reporting while we are changing our code."
"It should be easier to specify your own validation routines and sanitation routines."
"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."
"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."
"Coverity is not a user-friendly product."
"Coverity concerns its dashboards and reporting."
"There is not a central management for static and dynamic."
"A desktop version should be added."
"I would love to see more containers. Many of the tools are great, they require an amount of configuration, setup and infrastructure. If most the applications were in a container, I think everything would be a little bit faster, because all our clients are now using containers."
"Visibility is an issue for us. Our partners do not know we have integrations with some of IBM products."
"If HCL AppScan is able to alert the clients over email once the scan is complete, it would be great. Right now, HCL AppScan doesn't let me know if the scanning part is finished or not, because of which I have to come back and check mostly."
"They could incorporate AI to enhance vulnerability detection and improve the product's reporting capabilities."
"Many silly false positives are produced."
"The penetration testing feature should be included."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Coverity is very expensive."
"Depending on the usage types, one has to opt for different types of licenses from Coverity, especially to be able to use areas like report viewing or report generation."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"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."
"The tool was fairly priced."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."
"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."
"Coverity’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."
"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."
"The solution is cheap."
"The product is moderately priced, though it's an investment due to extensive code analysis needs."
"The price of HCL AppScan is okay, in my opinion. You just buy HCL AppScan and don't pay anything anymore, meaning it is just a one-time purchase."
"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."
"AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."
"Pricing was the main reason that we went ahead with this solution as they were the lowest in the market."
"The solution is moderately priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
871,408 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
32%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
4%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

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 Business13
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
 

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 do you like most about Coverity?
The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.
What do you like most about HCL AppScan?
The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase.
What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?
AppScan needs to improve its handling of false positives. It also requires enhancements in customer support, similar to what Veracode provides. Regularly scheduling calls with clients to discuss fe...
What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?
The primary use case for AppScan is for security purposes. I compare AppScan with other tools such as Veracode. We use AppScan for vulnerability detection and auto-remediation of vulnerabilities wi...
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity Static vs. HCL AppScan and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
871,408 professionals have used our research since 2012.