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

Coverity Static vs Invicti vs SonarQube Server (formerly 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 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 Invicti is 1.5%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) is 19.7%, down from 27.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube)19.7%
Coverity Static6.0%
Invicti1.5%
Other72.8%
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.…
Kunal M - PeerSpot reviewer
Proactive scanning measures and realistic audit recommendations enhance development focus
Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment. This feature helps us focus on priorities and prioritize the development team's effort, integrating seamlessly with DevOps to facilitate proactive scans of environments. Invicti also provides audit recommendations that are quite realistic, making it easy to discuss plans with developers.
Sthembiso Zondi - PeerSpot reviewer
Consistent improvements in code quality and security with effective integration and reliable technical support
The features of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) that I find most useful are the suggestions received from reviewing the code. When they review the code, they provide suggestions on how to fix it, and we find those very useful from a development perspective. We use SonarQube Server's (formerly SonarQube) centralized management and visualization of code quality metrics on the dashboard because that's the executive dashboard that we send to the executives to show where we are in terms of quality, security, and where the company can improve. We use that for organizational improvement purposes. The ability to tailor metrics tracking in SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) has been beneficial to my team. There are team-specific dashboards which are related to specific repositories they utilize, and we have that aggregative dashboard that shows the whole organization's performance. We can drill down per specific repository, which makes it easier for the team to improve specific things.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."
"The interface of Coverity is quite good, and it is also easy to use."
"It's pretty stable. I rate the stability of Coverity nine out of ten."
"The ability to scan code gives us details of existing and potential vulnerabilities. What really matters for us is to ensure that we are able to catch vulnerabilities ahead of time."
"The product has been beneficial in logging functionality, allowing me to categorize vulnerabilities based on severity. This aids in providing updated reports on subsequent scans."
"Coverity is easy to set up and has a less lengthy process to find vulnerabilities."
"It's very stable."
"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."
"I am impressed by the whole technology that they are using in this solution. It is really fast. When using netscan, the confirmation that it gives on the vulnerabilities is pretty cool. It is really easy to configure a scan in Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner. It is also really easy to deploy."
"It has very good integration with the CI/CD pipeline."
"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."
"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."
"Its ability to crawl a web application is quite different than another similar scanner."
"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."
"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."
"It correctly parses DOM and JS and has really good support for URL Rewrite rules, which is important for today's websites."
"SonarQube is one of the more popular solutions because it supports 29 languages."
"The fact that the solution does security scanning is valuable."
"It has very good scalability and stability."
"The product has a friendly UI that is easy to use and understand."
"When comparing other static code analysis tools, SonarQube has fewer false-positive issues being reported. They have a lot of support for different tech stacks. It covers the entire developer community which includes Salesforce or it could be the regular Java.net project. It has actually sufficed all the needs in one tool for static code analysis."
"We can create a Quality Gate in order to fail Jenkins jobs where the code coverage is lower than the set percentage."
"The solution is stable."
"It is a very good tool for analysis and security vulnerability checking."
 

Cons

"The product should include more customization options. The analytics is not as deep as compared to SonarQube."
"Its price can be improved. Price is always an issue with Synopsys."
"Ideally, it would have a user-based license that does not have a restriction in the number of lines of code."
"We use GitHub and Gitflow, and Coverity does not fit with Gitflow. I have to create a screen for our branches, and it's a pain for developers. It has been difficult to integrate Coverity with our system."
"The solution needs to improve its false positives."
"Zero-day vulnerability identification can be an add-on feature that Coverity can provide."
"The tool needs to improve its reporting."
"I had tried integrating the tool with Azure DevOps, but the report I got stated that my team faced many challenges."
"They don't really provide the proof of concept up to the level that we need in our organization. We are a consultancy firm, and we provide consultancy for the implementation and deployment solutions to our customers. When you run the scans and the scan is completed, it only shows the proof of exploit, which really doesn't work because the tool is running the scan and exploiting on the read-only form. You don't really know whether it is actually giving the proof of exploit. We cannot prove it manually to a customer that the exploit is genuine. It is really hard to perform it manually and prove it to the concerned development, remediation, and security teams. It is currently missing the static application security part of the application security, especially web application security. It would be really cool if they can integrate a SAS tool with their dynamic one."
"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."
"Maybe the ability to make a good reporting format is needed."
"The proxy review, the use report views, the current use tool and the subset requests need some improvement. It was hard to understand how to use them."
"They could enhance the support for data swap testing for the platform."
"Currently, there is nothing I would like to improve."
"Asset scanning could be better. Once, it couldn't scan assets, and the issue was strange. The price doesn't fit the budget of small and medium-sized businesses."
"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."
"Lacks sufficient visibility and documentation."
"SonarQube's detail in the security could be improved. It may be helpful to have additional details, with regards to Oracle PL/SQL. For example, it's neither as built nor as thorough as Java. For now, this is the only additional feature I would like to see."
"I see a problem with SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) because the vulnerability assessment is continuous; if I fix some vulnerabilities today, they reappear in the next scan, and there will be completely different issues that need to be fixed."
"Although it has Sonar built into it, it is still lacking. Customization features of identifying a particular attack still need to be worked on. To give you an example: if we want to scan and do a false positive analysis, those types of features are missing. If we want to rescan something from a particular point that is a feature that is also missing. It’s in our queue. That will hopefully save a lot of time."
"The learning curve can be fairly steep at first, but then, it's not an entry-level type of application. It's not like an introduction to C programming. You should know not just C programming and how to make projects but also how to apply its findings to the bigger picture. I've had users who said that they wish it was easier to understand how to configure, but I don't know if that's doable because what it's doing is a very complicated thing. I don't know if it is possible to make a complicated thing trivially simple."
"Our developers have complained about the Quality Gates and the number of false positives that this product reports."
"Depending on the tool's configuration, sometimes you get false alarms that are unimportant to you."
"I would like to see improvements in defining the quality sets of rules and the quality to ensure code with low-performance does not end up in production."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"It is expensive."
"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"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 price is competitive with other solutions."
"The solution is affordable."
"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 is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."
"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."
"It is competitive in the security market."
"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."
"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."
"The price should be 20% lower"
"We are using an NFR license and I do not know the exact price of the NFR license. I think 20 FQDN for three years would cost around 35,000 US Dollars."
"Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license."
"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."
"We are using the open-source version, which is available free of cost."
"We pay €10 per month for this solution, which is good. It provides a good value for money."
"We are using the Developer Edition and the cost is based on the amount of code that is being processed."
"The solution has a free version and a license version. The license is priced reasonably, the cost of hiring one programmer is more expensive than the solution."
"We are using the community version of the solution and we plan on purchasing licenses for the upgraded version soon. There is a limitation on how many lines of code can be scanned and this is why we are going to purchase a license for an increased amount."
"We have a license with 125,000 lines of code. We did not purchase a lot of lines but it is specific to our code environment."
"There are many different packages with different pricing options available. We are able to try what we have and if we need extra features we can upgrade the license."
"The development license cost is reasonable, and we've had no concerns about SonarQube when it comes to cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
869,513 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
32%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Healthcare Company
4%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Government
6%
 

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 Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise75
 

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 do you like most about Coverity?
The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?
As a technical user, I do not handle pricing or licensing, but I am aware that Invicti offers flexible licensing mode...
What do you like most about Invicti?
The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan.
What needs improvement with Invicti?
The main concern is on the performance side, but other than that, we find it really helpful in identifying web vulner...
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
Netsparker
Sonar
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: September 2025.
869,513 professionals have used our research since 2012.