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

Coverity vs Fortify Application Defender comparison

The compared Black Duck and OpenText solutions aren't in the same category. Black Duck is ranked #4 in SAST , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 8.3% mindshare in the category. OpenText is ranked #33 in AS , with an average rating of 7.0, and holds a 0.7% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Black Duck users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 81% of OpenText users who would recommend it.
Coverity
Read 42 Coverity reviews
  • 13,201 Views
  • 9,033 Comparison Views
88% willing to recommend
Fortify Application Defender
Read 11 Fortify Application Defender reviews
  • 1,090 Views
  • 891 Comparison Views
81% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive Summary
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.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Coverity vs. Fortify Application Defender Report (Updated: September 2022).
Buyer's Guide
Coverity vs. Fortify Application Defender
September 2022
Download the complete report
Helped 831,265 peers since 2012

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

Coverity
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (4th)
Fortify Application Defender
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (33rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Coverity and Fortify Application Defender aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Coverity is designed for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and holds a mindshare of 8.3%, up 7.2% compared to last year.
Fortify Application Defender, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 0.7% mindshare, down 0.9% since last year.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Read full review
Saroj-Patnaik - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable solution with excellent machine learning algorithms but expensive and lacking support
I primarily use Fortify Application Defender to assess whether our products can defend against applications Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications. Fortify Application Defender gives…
Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a scalable solution."
"Provides software security, and helps to find potential security bugs or defects."
"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is its interprocedural analysis, which is advantageous because it compares favorably with other tools in terms of security and code analysis."
"It help us identify the latest security vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is its software security feature called the Checker. If you share some vulnerability or weakness then the software can find any potential security bug or defect. The code integration tool enables some secure coding standards and implements some Checkers for Live Duo. So we can enable secure coding and Azure in this tool. So in our software, we can make sure our software combines some industry supervised data."
"Coverity is scalable."
"The tool as it is can be used for code quality improvement."
More Coverity pros
"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 information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."
"We are able to provide out customers with a secure application after development. They are no longer left wondering if they are vulnerable to different threats within the market following deployment."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"The product saves us cost and time."
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."
"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."
More Fortify Application Defender pros
 

Cons

"The reporting tool integration process is sometimes slow."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"Coverity could improve the ease of use. Sometimes things become difficult and you need to follow the guides from the website but the guides could be better."
"Zero-day vulnerability identification can be an add-on feature that Coverity can provide."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"It would be great if we could customize the rules to focus on critical issues."
"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."
"We'd like it to be faster."
More Coverity cons
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"The false positive rate should be lower."
"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."
"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."
"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."
More Fortify Application Defender cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Offers varying prices for different companies"
"Coverity is very expensive."
"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"The solution is affordable."
"Coverity’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."
"This is a pretty expensive solution. The overall value of the solution could be improved if the price was reduced. Licensing is done on an annual basis."
"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."
"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."
More Coverity pricing and cost advice
"The product’s price is much higher than other tools."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive."
"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten. It comes as an annual cloud subscription. The tool's pricing is around 50 lakhs."
"The licensing is very complex, it's project based and can range from $10,000 to $200,000+ depending on the project type and size."
"The base licensing costs for the SaaS platform is about $900 USD per application, per year."
"Fortify Application Defender is very expensive."
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
32%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
4%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
See all answers
What do you like most about Coverity?
The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?
I do not know about the pricing.
See all answers
What do you like most about Fortify Application Defender?
I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Fortify Application Defender?
The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and...
See all answers
What is your primary use case for Fortify Application Defender?
We use the solution for fast code review. It is integrated into our DevOps pipeline.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity Logo
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity
Compared 53% of the time
Klocwork vs Coverity Logo
Klocwork vs Coverity
Compared 7% of the time
Fortify on Demand vs Coverity Logo
Fortify on Demand vs Coverity
Compared 6% of the time
Veracode vs Coverity Logo
Veracode vs Coverity
Compared 5% of the time
Checkmarx One vs Coverity Logo
Checkmarx One vs Coverity
Compared 5% of the time
More Coverity Competitors
Checkmarx One vs Fortify Application Defender Logo
Checkmarx One vs Fortify Application Defender
Compared 42% of the time
Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Fortify Application Defender Logo
Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Fortify Application Defender
Compared 15% of the time
CAST Application Intelligence Platform vs Fortify Application Defender Logo
CAST Application Intelligence Platform vs Fortify Application Defender
Compared 12% of the time
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Fortify Application Defender Logo
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Fortify Application Defender
Compared 11% of the time
Snyk vs Fortify Application Defender Logo
Snyk vs Fortify Application Defender
Compared 6% of the time
More Fortify Application Defender Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Coverity
January 2025
Coverity reportDownload Coverity product report
Buyer's Guide
Application Security Tools
December 2024
Fortify Application Defender reportDownload Fortify Application Defender product report
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender
 

Learn More

Black Duck
OpenText
 

Overview

Coverity gives you the speed, ease of use, accuracy, industry standards compliance, and scalability that you need to develop high-quality, secure applications. Coverity identifies critical software quality defects and security vulnerabilities in code as it’s written, early in the development process, when it’s least costly and easiest to fix. With the Code Sight integrated development environment (IDE) plugin, developers get accurate analysis in seconds in their IDE as they code. Precise actionable remediation advice and context-specific eLearning help your developers understand how to fix their prioritized issues quickly, without having to become security experts. 

Coverity seamlessly integrates automated security testing into your CI/CD pipelines and supports your existing development tools and workflows. Choose where and how to do your development: on-premises or in the cloud with the Polaris Software Integrity Platform (SaaS), a highly scalable, cloud-based application security platform. Coverity supports more than 20 languages and 200 frameworks and templates.

Micro Focus Security Fortify Application Defender is a runtime application self-protection (RASP) solution that helps you manage and mitigate risk from homegrown or third-party applications. It provides centralized visibility into application use and abuse while protecting from software vulnerability exploits and other violations in real time.

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
ServiceMaster, Saltworks, SAP
Buyer's Guide
Coverity vs. Fortify Application Defender
September 2022
Free Report: Coverity vs. Fortify Application Defender
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. Fortify Application Defender and other solutions. Updated: September 2022.
DOWNLOAD NOW
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.