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

Coverity vs GitHub Code Scanning 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

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
GitHub Code Scanning
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
17th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
3
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 Coverity is 8.0%, up from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GitHub Code Scanning is 1.0%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

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.
VishalSingh - PeerSpot reviewer
Traverses the entire network, scanning every system to determine which ports are open
You can use the tool locally on your system or in the cloud. I rate it a nine out of ten. It's a very good tool for people who want to start using GitHubCode Scanning, especially for software development or team collaboration. GitHubCode Scanning allows teams to collaborate by uploading files to repositories. For example, if someone is developing an application, they can host the code on GitHub Code Scanning. Other developers can then download the code for testing purposes. If bugs are found, fixes can be applied using the GitHub Code Scanningrepository, and everyone on the team can see the changes. Software developers often use GitHub Code Scanning for version control, and it's essential for CI/CD pipelines to work.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Coverity is easy to set up and has a less lengthy process to find vulnerabilities."
"The reporting feature is up to the mark."
"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"I encountered a bug with Coverity, and I opened a ticket. Support provided me with a workaround. So it's working at the moment, or at least it seems to be."
"It's pretty stable. I rate the stability of Coverity nine out of ten."
"The solution has improved our code quality and security very well."
"Coverity is scalable."
"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."
"We use GitHub Code Scanning mostly for source code management."
"GitHub Code Spaces brings significant value with its simplicity and ease of use."
"The solution helps identify vulnerabilities by understanding how ports communicate with applications running on a system. Ports are like house numbers; to visit someone's house, you must know their number. Similarly, ports are used to communicate with applications. For example, if you want to use an HTTP web server, you must use port 80. It is the port on which the web application or your server listens for incoming requests."
 

Cons

"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"Zero-day vulnerability identification can be an add-on feature that Coverity can provide."
"Ideally, it would have a user-based license that does not have a restriction in the number of lines of code."
"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."
"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."
"The solution needs to improve its false positives."
"Some features are not performing well, like duplicate detection and switch case situations."
"We're currently facing a primary challenge with automation using Coverity. Each developer has a license and can perform manual checks, and we also have a nightly build that analyzes the entire software. The main issue is that the tool can't look behind submodules in our code base, so it doesn't see changes stored there."
"One area for improvement could be the ability to have an AI system digest the reports generated from code scanning and provide a summary. Currently, the reports can be extensive, and users may overlook details, such as outdated libraries, which could be highlighted for attention."
"GitHub Code Scanning should add more templates."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"Coverity is quite expensive."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"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’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."
"The tool was fairly priced."
"It is expensive."
"The tool's price is somewhere in the middle. It's neither cheap nor expensive. I would rate the pricing a five out of ten."
"GitHub Code Scanning is a moderately priced solution."
"The minimum pricing for the tool is five dollars a month."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
33%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
4%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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...
What do you like most about Coverity?
The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.
What do you like most about GitHub Code Scanning?
We use GitHub Code Scanning mostly for source code management.
What needs improvement with GitHub Code Scanning?
One area for improvement could be the ability to have an AI system digest the reports generated from code scanning and provide a summary. Currently, the reports can be extensive, and users may over...
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. GitHub Code Scanning and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.