We performed a comparison between CodeSonar and SonarQube 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 of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."
"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."
"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."
"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."
"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."
"It has been able to scale."
"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."
"We are using the Community edition. So, we don't have to incur any licensing costs. This is the best part."
"The static code analysis is very good."
"It easily ties into our continuous integration pipeline."
"It is working fine. It provides a good value for money."
"It's enabled us to improve software quality and help us to disseminate best practices."
"We use this solution for qualitative coding. We make use of the SonarLint plugin as well as the dashboard."
"SonarQube is scalable. My company has 50 users."
"The initial setup is simple. It requires some security, but it's simple."
"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."
"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."
"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."
"It was expensive."
"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."
"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."
"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."
"The interface could be a little better and should be enhanced."
"Expression of common vulnerabilities and exposures is not always current."
"I find it is light on the security side."
"For improvement, this solution could be offered on Docker and the cloud and the support for this solution could be improved. Customizing rules could also be made simpler."
"SonarQube's detail in the security could be improved. It may be helpful to have additional details, with regards to Oracle PL/SQL. For example, it's neither as built nor as thorough as Java. For now, this is the only additional feature I would like to see."
"The time it took for me to do the whole process was approximately two hours because I had to download, read the documentation, and do the configurations."
"The product needs to integrate other security tools for security scanning."
"There is no automation. You need to put the code there and test. You then pull the results and put them back in the development environment. There is no integration with the development environment. We would like it to be integrated with our development environment, which is basically the CI/CD pipeline or the IDE that we have."
CodeSonar is ranked 21st in Application Security Tools with 7 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 110 reviews. CodeSonar is rated 8.2, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CodeSonar writes "Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". CodeSonar is most compared with Coverity, Klocwork, Polyspace Code Prover, Semgrep Code and Fortify Static Code Analyzer, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and HCL AppScan. See our CodeSonar vs. SonarQube report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.
