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
 

Categories and Ranking

Acunetix
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (12th), Vulnerability Management (17th), DevSecOps (5th)
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 December 2024, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 3.3%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Coverity is 8.5%, up from 7.2% 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

"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."
"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."
"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."
"The most important feature is that it's a web-based graphical user interface. That is a great addition. Also, the ability to schedule scans is great."
"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"By integrating with CI/CD tools, it enables a shift-left approach in the development process."
"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"Acunetix is the best service in the world. It is easy to manage. It gives a lot of information to the users to see and identify problems in their site or applications. It works very well."
"Considering the analysis part and the benchmarking process involving the product that my company carried out, the solution is good for finding bugs and violations"
"The tool as it is can be used for code quality improvement."
"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."
"Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."
"The product is easy to use."
"Coverity integrates with issue-tracking systems like Jira and provides email notifications, alerts, and other features."
"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."
"The features I find most valuable is that our entire company can publish the analysis results into our central space."
 

Cons

"It is difficult to create a proxy connection."
"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"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."
"I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection."
"Acunetix needs to improve its cost."
"When monitoring the traffic we always have issues with the bandwidth consumption and the throttling of traffic."
"The jargon used makes it difficult for project managers to understand the issues, and the technical explanations used make it difficult for developers to understand issues. These things should be simplified much more. That would be very helpful for us when explaining to them what needs to be fixed. The report output needs to be simplified."
"We'd like it to be faster."
"It should be easier to specify your own validation routines and sanitation routines."
"Reporting engine needs to be more robust."
"Coverity is far from perfection, and I'm not 100 percent sure it's helping me find what I need to find in my role. We need exactly what we are looking for, i.e. security errors and vulnerabilities. It doesn't seem to be reporting while we are changing our code."
"Right now, the Coverity executable is around 1.2GB to download. If they can reduce it to approximately 600 or 700MB, that would be great. If they decrease the executable, it will be much easier to work in an environment like Docker."
"The level of vulnerability that this solution covers could be improved compared to other open source tools."
"They could improve the usability. For example, how you set things up, even though it's straightforward, it could be still be easier."
"Zero-day vulnerability identification can be an add-on feature that Coverity can provide."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."
"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
"When we looked at all other vendors and what they were asking for, to provide a third of what Acunetix was capable of doing, it was an easy decision... But now that it's coming to a cost where it's line with market value, it becomes more of a competition... Acunetix is raising the cost of licensing. It's 3.5 times what we were initially quoted."
"The price is exceptionally high."
"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."
"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."
"Coverity is quite expensive."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."
"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."
"Depending on the usage types, one has to opt for different types of licenses from Coverity, especially to be able to use areas like report viewing or report generation."
"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."
"The solution is affordable."
"Offers varying prices for different companies"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
824,052 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
32%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
8%
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 use Acunetix for penetration testing purposes. This is the primary use case.
What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
I rate the overall solution nine out of ten. I prefer Acunetix for its more precise and accurate results.
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.
 

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: December 2024.
824,052 professionals have used our research since 2012.