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

Coverity vs Ixia BreakingPoint comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ixia BreakingPoint
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
35th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 7.4%, up from 6.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ixia BreakingPoint is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
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.…
Sai Prasad - PeerSpot reviewer
Works better for testing traffic, mix profile, and enrollment scenarios than other solutions
Once, when I raised a ticket regarding a hardware or software issue, the solution's support team visited our company to discuss and find out ways to solve the problem. Sometimes, they asked us to send several photos from the back and front end to identify the issue. It was time-consuming as we were occupied with some other testing simultaneously. Instead, it would have been great if they could have visited our company and rectified the problem.

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."
"This solution is easy to use."
"Coverity integrates with issue-tracking systems like Jira and provides email notifications, alerts, and other features."
"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."
"In my opinion, the most effective Coverity feature for identifying critical vulnerabilities is the extra checks, which offers deep analysis."
"It has the lowest false positives."
"The product is easy to use."
"I like Coverity's capability to scan codes once we push it. We don't need more time to review our colleagues' codes. Its UI is pretty straightforward."
"We use Ixia BreakingPoint for Layer 7 traffic generation. That's what we like."
"There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades."
"The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use."
"I like that we can test cloud applications."
"The most valuable feature of Ixia BreakingPoint is the ransomware and malware database for simulated attacks."
 

Cons

"We'd like it to be faster."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"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 would be great if we could customize the rules to focus on critical issues."
"They could improve the usability. For example, how you set things up, even though it's straightforward, it could be still be easier."
"The product lacks sufficient customization options."
"Coverity is not stable."
"The price could be better."
"They should improve UI mode packages for the users."
"The integration could improve in Ixia BreakingPoint."
"I would appreciate some preconfigured network neighborhoods, which are predefined settings for testing networks."
"The quality of the traffic generation could be improved with Ixia BreakingPoint, i.e. to get closer to being accurate in what a real user will do."
"The solution originally was hard to configure; I'm not sure if they've updated this to make it simpler, but if not, it's something that could be streamlined."
"The production traffic simulations are not realistic enough for some types of DDoS attacks."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Coverity is very expensive."
"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"It is expensive."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."
"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."
"Coverity’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."
"The tool was fairly priced."
"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."
"or us, the pricing is somewhere around $12,000 a year. I'm unsure as to what new licenses now cost."
"The solution is expensive."
"The price of the solution is expensive."
"There is no differentiation in licenses for Breaking Point. For one license, you will get all the features. There is no complexity in that."
"The price is high. We pay for the license monthly."
"We have a one year subscription license for $25,000 US Dollars."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
32%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
4%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

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...
What do you like most about Coverity?
The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Corsa Technology
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. Ixia BreakingPoint and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.