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 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."
"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."
"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."
"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."
"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."
"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."
"The most valuable features are code scanning and Quality Gates."
"The features of SonarQube that I find most valuable for identifying code smells are its comprehensive code analysis capabilities, which cover various aspects of code sustainability."
"Some of the most valuable features have been the latest up-to-date of the OWASP, the monitoring, the reporting, and the ease of use with the IDE plugins, in terms of integration."
"There are many options and examples available in the tool that help us fix the issues it shows us."
"We've configured it to run on each commit, providing feedback on our software quality. ]"
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is free."
"The solution's user interface is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, easy to access, and they provide good training files."
"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."
"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."
"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."
"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."
"It was expensive."
"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."
"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."
"A robust credential scanner would be a huge bonus as it would remove the need for yet another niche product."
"The solution could improve by having better-consulting services."
"Technical support and the price could be better."
"It would be better if SonarQube provided a good UI for external configuration."
"We found a solution with dynamic testing, and are looking to find a solution that can be used for both types of testing."
"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."
"The documentation is not clear and it needs to be updated."
"Our developers have complained about the Quality Gates and the number of false positives that this product reports."
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.