We performed a comparison between Kiuwan and Klocwork based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the time to resolution, where it tells you how long it is going to take to get to a zero-base or a five-star security rating."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report."
"We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."
"Software analytics for a lot of different languages including ABAP."
"We are using this solution to increase the quality of our software and to test the vulnerabilities in our tools before the customers find them."
"The solution has a continuous integration process."
"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."
"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."
"Klocwork's most valuable feature is the static code analysis feature. It detects the potential problem earlier to allow the developer to receive feedback quickly and then address it before it becomes a problem."
"The reporting helps us understand the trend of our results and whether we improve over time. We can see the history within Klocwork's server architecture and know that we're making things better. It creates a great story for our management. We can demonstrate value and how our software is developing over time."
"Technical support is quite good."
"We like using the static analysis and code refactoring, which are very valuable because of our requirements to meet safety critical levels and reliability."
"One can increase the number of vendors, so the solution is scalable."
"There's a feature in Klocwork called 'on-the-fly analysis', which helps developers to find and fix the defects at the time of development itself."
"There is a central Klocwork server at our headquarter in France so we connect the client directly to the server on-premises remotely."
"On-the-fly analysis and incremental analysis are the best parts of Klocwork. Currently, we are using both of these features very effectively."
"The development-to-delivery phase."
"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."
"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."
"I would like to see better integration with the Visual Studio and Eclipse IDEs."
"Integration of the programming tools could be improved."
"Kiuwan's support has room for improvement. You can only open a ticket is through email, and the support team is outside of our country. They should have a support number or chat."
"I would like to see additional languages supported."
"It would be beneficial to streamline calls and transitions seamlessly for improved functionality."
"This solution could be improved if they offered support of more languages including Ada and Golang. They currently only support seven languages."
"I believe it should support more languages, such as Python and JavaScript."
"What needs improvement in Klocwork, compared to other products in the market, is the dashboard or reporting mechanisms that need to be a bit more flexible. The Klocwork dashboard could be improved. Though it's good, it's not as good as some of the other products in the market, which is a problem. The reporting could be more detailed and easier to sort out because sorting in Klocwork could be a bit more time-consuming, mainly when sorting defects based on filters, compared to how it's done on other tools such as Coverity."
"The main problem is that since it only parses the code, the warnings or the problems that are given as a result of the report can sometimes require a lot of effort to analyze."
"I would like to see better codes between projects and a more user-friendly desktop in the next release."
"Every update that we receive requires of us a lengthy and involved process."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
"The way to define the rules is too complex. The definition/rules for static analysis could be automated according to various SILs, so as to avoid confusion."
Kiuwan is ranked 21st in Application Security Tools with 23 reviews while Klocwork is ranked 18th in Application Security Tools with 20 reviews. Kiuwan is rated 8.6, while Klocwork is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Kiuwan writes "Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Klocwork writes "Their technical team helps us get the most out of the solution, but we've faced some stability problems in our environment". Kiuwan is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Veracode, Snyk and Fortify on Demand, whereas Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover, CodeSonar and Checkmarx One. See our Kiuwan vs. Klocwork report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
