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)
4th
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)
31st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (47th)
 

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 Spirent CyberFlood is 0.3%, 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 most valuable feature is that there were not a whole lot of false positives, at least on the codebases that I looked at."
"This solution is easy to use."
"Coverity provides excellent compliance and other features, which is a very good part."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It help us identify the latest security vulnerabilities."
"Coverity is easy to set up and has a less lengthy process to find vulnerabilities."
"The solution has helped to increase staff productivity and improved our work significantly by approximately 20 percent."
"It's very stable."
"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."
"The testing compliance feature is particularly impressive."
"CyberFlood is flexible."
"The testing compliance feature is particularly impressive."
"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."
"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."
 

Cons

"The product lacks sufficient customization options."
"The product should include more customization options. The analytics is not as deep as compared to SonarQube."
"It should be easier to specify your own validation routines and sanitation routines."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"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."
"Coverity concerns its dashboards and reporting."
"I had tried integrating the tool with Azure DevOps, but the report I got stated that my team faced many challenges."
"It would be great if we could customize the rules to focus on critical issues."
"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."
"The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation."
"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."
"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."
"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."
"The initial setup is not straightforward and can be quite challenging."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"Coverity is very expensive."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."
"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."
"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."
"Coverity is quite 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.
857,162 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%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

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: June 2025.
857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.