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

Coverity Static vs Polyspace Code Prover 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Coverity Static
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (5th)
Polyspace Code Prover
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
2.3
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Coverity Static and Polyspace Code Prover aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Coverity Static is designed for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and holds a mindshare of 6.0%, down 7.3% compared to last year.
Polyspace Code Prover, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 1.4% mindshare, up 1.0% since last year.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Coverity Static6.0%
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube)19.7%
Checkmarx One10.0%
Other64.3%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Polyspace Code Prover1.4%
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube)20.4%
Checkmarx One10.4%
Other67.80000000000001%
Application Security Tools
 

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.…
Pradeep Panchakarla - PeerSpot reviewer
A reliable solution that provides excellent features and detects memory corruption
The run time analysis process must be improved. If we do not run with the main loop, it generates its own main and doesn’t allow developers to modify the execution sequences. The solution must provide more flexibility to the developers to manipulate the runtime analysis tools. The developer must be allowed to modify the main sequence. It will be very easy for them to test their use cases. Otherwise, Polyspace generates a random main file and executes all the functions randomly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The interface of Coverity is quite good, and it is also easy to use."
"Coverity is scalable."
"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."
"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."
"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Considering the analysis part and the benchmarking process involving the product that my company carried out, the solution is good for finding bugs and violations"
"The features I find most valuable is that our entire company can publish the analysis results into our central space."
"Coverity integrates with issue-tracking systems like Jira and provides email notifications, alerts, and other features."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"Efficiency and speed are the advantages I see in Code Sonar over Polyspace Code Prover."
"The outputs are very reliable."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."
 

Cons

"Zero-day vulnerability identification can be an add-on feature that Coverity can provide."
"Coverity is not a user-friendly product."
"Coverity's implementation cycle is very slow when integrating changes, especially for problems related to event handling and memory leaks."
"We'd like it to be faster."
"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 setup takes very long."
"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."
"The product lacks sufficient customization options."
"Because we had difficulties in efficiently integrating Polyspace Code Prover into our CI toolchain, these tests are mostly run manually and only occasionally."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"The tool has some stability issues."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 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."
"Offers varying prices for different companies"
"The solution is affordable."
"The solution's pricing is comparable to other products."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."
"We use the paid version."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
872,008 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%
Manufacturing Company
40%
Computer Software Company
9%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
5%
Financial Services Firm
3%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
 

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 Polyspace Code Prover?
When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts,...
What needs improvement with Polyspace Code Prover?
I'm still trying to use constraints with range propagation, but I can't get it to work properly, and I haven't found any documentation. It require support. There could be an issue with range propag...
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: October 2025.
872,008 professionals have used our research since 2012.