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

Polyspace Code Prover vs SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 2025

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

Polyspace Code Prover
Ranking in Application Security Tools
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SonarQube Server (formerly ...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (1st), Software Development Analytics (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Polyspace Code Prover is 1.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) is 24.5%, down from 27.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Wang Dayong - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages
The product provides false reports sometimes. It also fails to understand the context of the code. It reports that a line of code has issues without considering its relation with the previous line. The product should improve the report quality. While it asks us to improve the code quality, it would be good if it also suggests how to improve the quality.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product detects memory corruptions."
"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."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"The outputs are very reliable."
"I like the by-default policies that are they, as they seem to cover most of what I need."
"The static code analysis is very good."
"This solution is simple to use and can be quickly deployed."
"It assists during the development with SonarLint and helps the developer to change his approach or rather improve his coding pattern or style. That's one advantage I've seen. Another advantage is that we can customize the rules."
"We've configured it to run on each commit, providing feedback on our software quality. ]"
"SonarQube is designed well making it easy to use, simple to identify issues and find solutions to problems."
"It provides the security that is required from a solution for financial businesses."
"Provides local scanning for developers."
 

Cons

"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"The tool has some stability issues."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"We're in the process of figuring out how to automate the workflow for QA audit controls on it. I think that's perhaps an area that we could use some buffing. We're a Kubernetes shop, so there are some things that aren't direct fits, which we're struggling with on the component Docker side. But nothing major."
"I find it is light on the security side."
"Technical support and the price could be better."
"I would also like SonarQube to be able to write custom scanning rules. More documentation would be helpful as well because some of our guys were struggling with the customization script."
"A better design of the interface and add some new rules."
"I think the code security can be improved."
"The solution could improve by providing more advanced technologies."
"If there was an official Docker image of SonarQube that could easily integrate into the pipeline would help the user to plug in and plug out and use it directly without any custom configuration. I am not sure if this is being offered already in an update but it would be very helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We use the paid version."
"The free version of SonarQube does everything that we need it to."
"SonarQube is a fairly affordable solution for a larger scale if you have a specific role or specific department for secure code."
"There are many different packages with different pricing options available. We are able to try what we have and if we need extra features we can upgrade the license."
"We are using the free, unlicensed version."
"We have a license with 125,000 lines of code. We did not purchase a lot of lines but it is specific to our code environment."
"SonarQube enterprise, I am not sure of the price but from what I understand they are charging a fee. It's is not clear if it is an annual fee or a one-off."
"I think comparing the product to competitors it should be less expensive."
"We use the free version; there are no hidden costs or licensing required."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
39%
Computer Software Company
12%
Transportation Company
4%
Government
4%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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...
Is SonarQube the best tool for static analysis?
I am not very familiar with SonarQube and their solutions, so I can not answer. But if you are asking me about which tools that are the best for for Static Code Analysis, I suggest you have a look...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...
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...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Sonar
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Polyspace Code Prover vs. SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.