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

Coverity vs Spirent CyberFlood 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)
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Spirent CyberFlood
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
29th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (32nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 7.0%, up from 6.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Spirent CyberFlood is 0.4%, 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

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.…
Jos Badimo - PeerSpot reviewer
Test assurance improves compliance and products with good performance
The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation. The most significant issue I encounter with the solution is the user interface. It would be beneficial if I could remain on one screen most of the time. Even if the system navigates me to another screen, it should effectively return me to the main screen.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."
"Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."
"This solution is easy to use."
"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
"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."
"It has the lowest false positives."
"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."
"The testing compliance feature is particularly impressive."
"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."
"The testing compliance feature is particularly impressive."
"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."
"CyberFlood is flexible."
 

Cons

"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."
"I would like to see integration with popular IDEs, such as Eclipse."
"The solution needs to improve its false positives."
"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."
"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."
"There should be additional IDE support."
"It would be great if we could customize the rules to focus on critical issues."
"Coverity is not stable."
"Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing."
"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."
"The initial setup is not straightforward and can be quite challenging."
"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."
"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."
"The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"Coverity’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."
"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."
"The solution is affordable."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"The solution's pricing is comparable to other products."
"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."
"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"CyberFlood is reasonably priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
32%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Government
4%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 needs improvement with Spirent CyberFlood?
The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation. The most significant issue I encounter with the solution is the user interface. It would be beneficial if I could remain on one...
What is your primary use case for Spirent CyberFlood?
I have been using the solution for a year now. The customers I work with are focused on both custom test assurance and test automation. The solution is utilized in the financial services sector and...
What advice do you have for others considering Spirent CyberFlood?
The language barrier and time difference pose significant issues with customer support. The price is competitive. The biggest benefits I find are test assurance, the reliability of the test results...
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
CyberFlood Virtual, Spirent Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing, Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Digicel
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. Spirent CyberFlood and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.