We performed a comparison between Coverity and Fortify Application Defender based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Coverity is easy to set up and has a less lengthy process to find vulnerabilities."
"I encountered a bug with Coverity, and I opened a ticket. Support provided me with a workaround. So it's working at the moment, or at least it seems to be."
"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The reporting feature is up to the mark."
"The solution has helped to increase staff productivity and improved our work significantly by approximately 20 percent."
"The product is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."
"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"The information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."
"The tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."
"The product saves us cost and time."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."
"We'd like it to be faster."
"It would be great if we could customize the rules to focus on critical issues."
"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."
"The setup takes very long."
"The tool needs to improve its reporting."
"Coverity is not stable."
"When I put my code into Coverity for scanning, the code information of the product is in the system. The solution could be improved by providing a SBOM, a software bill of material."
"They could improve the usability. For example, how you set things up, even though it's straightforward, it could be still be easier."
"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"The false positive rate should be lower."
"The solution could improve the time it takes to scan. When comparing it to SonarQube it does it in minutes while in Fortify Application Defender it can take hours."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."
"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."
Coverity is ranked 4th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 34 reviews while Fortify Application Defender is ranked 30th in Application Security Tools with 11 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.8, while Fortify Application Defender is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortify Application Defender writes "Useful for fast code review in devOps pipelines ". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Mend.io, whereas Fortify Application Defender is most compared with Checkmarx One, CAST Application Intelligence Platform, SonarQube, Qualys Web Application Scanning and Fortify on Demand. See our Coverity vs. Fortify Application Defender report.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.
