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

Acunetix vs Coverity 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

Acunetix
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (17th), Vulnerability Management (23rd), DevSecOps (6th)
Coverity
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 3.5%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Coverity is 8.0%, up from 7.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

AnubhavGoswami - PeerSpot reviewer
Attractive automated reports with boost user productivity and an easy setup
The primary use is mainly related to vulnerability assessment, including both public and internal IP addresses By using this tool, we have reduced the workload and increased the productivity of users. It generates automated reports. This feature is beneficial when sharing reports with clients as…
Md. Shahriar Hussain - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers impressive reporting features with user-friendliness and high scalability
The solution can be easily setup but requires heavy integration due to the multiple types of port and programming languages involved. Comparing the resource requirements of the solution I would say it can be installed effortlessly. I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. A professional needs some pre-acquired knowledge to manage Coverity's deployment process, but the local solution partners provide support well enough for trouble-free deployment. The overall deployment process of Coverity took around two and a half hours in our organization. The deployment duration depends upon the operating system and resources including high-end RAM and CPU processors.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."
"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."
"Picks up weaknesses in our app setups."
"I find it to be one of the most comprehensive tools, with support for manual intervention."
"It can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."
"The automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment."
"Overall, it's a very good tool and a very good engine."
"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."
"This solution is easy to use."
"The solution has improved our code quality and security very well."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is the wrapper. We use the wrapper to build the C++ component, then we use the other code analysis to analyze the code to the build object, and then send back the result to the SonarQube server. Additionally, it is a powerful capabilities solution."
"The reporting feature is up to the mark."
"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
"Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."
"We were very comfortable with the initial setup."
"The ability to scan code gives us details of existing and potential vulnerabilities. What really matters for us is to ensure that we are able to catch vulnerabilities ahead of time."
 

Cons

"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."
"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us."
"The only problem that they have is the price. It is a bit expensive, and you cannot change the number of applications for the whole year."
"It should be easier to recreate something manually, with the manual tool, because Acunetix is an automatic tool. If it finds something, it should be easier to manually replicate it. Sometimes you don't get the raw data from the input and output, so that could be improved."
"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."
"There was an issue related to updates from the internet."
"When monitoring the traffic we always have issues with the bandwidth consumption and the throttling of traffic."
"The solution could use more rules."
"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."
"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."
"It would be great if we could customize the rules to focus on critical issues."
"Ideally, it would have a user-based license that does not have a restriction in the number of lines of code."
"Coverity is not a user-friendly product."
"Sometimes it's a bit hard to figure out how to use the product’s UI."
"Zero-day vulnerability identification can be an add-on feature that Coverity can provide."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
"The solution is expensive."
"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
"It is a bit expensive. If you need to check five applications, you have to pay almost 14,000. It is an agreement for two years at 7,000 per year for only five applications. You cannot change the applications in the license. So, you are stuck with the same license for the five applications for one full year."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable."
"The price is exceptionally high."
"When compared with other products, the pricing is a little bit high. But it gives value for the price. It serves the purpose and is worthwhile for the price we pay."
"Implementing Acunetix needs a medium or larger business agency, because you need some money to get Acunetix. It is costly, but if you care about your agency's security, then maybe it's a cost that might help you in the future."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"The solution is affordable."
"The tool was fairly priced."
"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."
"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"I would rate Coverity's pricing as a nine out of ten. It's already very expensive, and it's a problem for us to get more licenses due to the price. The pricing model has some good aspects - for example, a personal license gives access to all languages without code limitations, which is better than some competitors. However, it's still a lot of money for us to spend."
"Coverity is quite expensive."
"It is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
33%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code.
What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
I typically use Acunetix ( /products/acunetix-reviews ) to identify vulnerabilities for clients.
What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
I would recommend Acunetix to others. Overall, I rate this solution seven out of ten.
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.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
Synopsys Static Analysis
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. Coverity and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.