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

Coverity vs HCL AppScan 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
HCL AppScan
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
10th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (14th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st)
 

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 HCL AppScan is 2.7%, up from 2.7% 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.
Rishi Anupam - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable and scalable scanning solution with good reporting feature
The solution is used for the vulnerabilities scan on the network side The reporting part is the most valuable feature. The penetration testing feature should be included. I have been using the solution for four years. It is a stable solution. I rate it seven out of ten. It is a scalable…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Coverity integrates with issue-tracking systems like Jira and provides email notifications, alerts, and other features."
"One of the most valuable features is Contributing Events. That particular feature helps the developer understand the root cause of a defect. So you can locate the starting point of the defect and figure out exactly how it is being exploited."
"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."
"Coverity gives advisory and deviation features, which are some of the parts I liked."
"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."
"It help us identify the latest security vulnerabilities."
"We leverage it as a quality check against code."
"We use it as a security testing application."
"It is easy it is to use. It is quick to find things, because of the code scanning tools. It's quite simple to use and it is very good the way it reports the findings."
"The product is useful, particularly in its sensitivity and scanning capabilities."
"It has certainly helped us find vulnerabilities in our software, so this is priceless in the end."
"The security and the dashboard are the most valuable features."
"The reporting part is the most valuable feature."
"It provides a better integration for our ecosystem."
 

Cons

"I had tried integrating the tool with Azure DevOps, but the report I got stated that my team faced many challenges."
"Its price can be improved. Price is always an issue with Synopsys."
"We actually specified several checkers, but we found some checkers had a higher false positive rate. I think this is a problem. Because we have to waste some time is really the issue because the issue is not an issue. I mean, the tool pauses or an issue, but the same issue is the filter now.Some check checkers cannot find some issues, but sometimes they find issues that are not relevant, right, that are not really issues. Some customisation mechanism can be added in the next release so that we can define our Checker. The Modelling feature provided by Coverity helps in finding more information for potential issues but it is not mature enough, it should be mature. The fast testing feature for security testing campaign can be added as well. So if you correctly integrate it with the training team, maybe you can help us to find more potential issues."
"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."
"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."
"We'd like it to be faster."
"The quality of the code needs improvement."
"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."
"The product has some technical limitations."
"We would like to see a check in the specific vulnerabilities in mobile applications or rooted devices, such as jailbreaking devices."
"I would love to see more containers. Many of the tools are great, they require an amount of configuration, setup and infrastructure. If most the applications were in a container, I think everything would be a little bit faster, because all our clients are now using containers."
"They could incorporate AI to enhance vulnerability detection and improve the product's reporting capabilities."
"The penetration testing feature should be included."
"A desktop version should be added."
"IBM Security AppScan needs to add performance optimization for quickly scanning the target web applications."
"The solution's scalability can be a matter of concern because one license runs on one machine only."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."
"The solution's pricing is comparable to other products."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"Offers varying prices for different companies"
"Coverity’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."
"The tool was fairly priced."
"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."
"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."
"AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."
"I rate the product's price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high. HCL AppScan is an expensive tool."
"I would rate the product's pricing a nine out of ten. The product's pricing is expensive compared to the features that they offer."
"The solution is cheap."
"The product is moderately priced, though it's an investment due to extensive code analysis needs."
"HCL AppScan is expensive."
"The tool was 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
Manufacturing Company
33%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
4%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

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...
What do you like most about Coverity?
The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.
What do you like most about HCL AppScan?
The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase.
What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?
AppScan needs to improve its handling of false positives. It also requires enhancements in customer support, similar to what Veracode provides. Regularly scheduling calls with clients to discuss fe...
What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?
The primary use case for AppScan is for security purposes. I compare AppScan with other tools such as Veracode. We use AppScan for vulnerability detection and auto-remediation of vulnerabilities wi...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. HCL AppScan and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.