Coverity vs Invicti comparison

Read 28 Invicti reviews

3,009 Views
1,606 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Coverity

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Invicti and Coverity are leading application security solutions. Coverity seems to have the upper hand due to its robust features, which suggest better value.

Features: Invicti offers comprehensive vulnerability detection in dynamic application security testing, provides effective real-time scanning, and ensures competitive pricing. Coverity offers robust static analysis capabilities, integrates well with continuous integration pipelines, and delivers deeper code analysis.

Room for Improvement: Invicti requires enhanced reporting tools, more intuitive navigation, and better customization options. Coverity needs faster scanning speeds, more streamlined deployment processes, and reduced initial complexity.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Invicti is known for quick setup times and thorough customer support, offering simplicity in installation. Coverity, while more complex to deploy, is preferred for its responsive and knowledgeable service team, valued for technical guidance.

Pricing and ROI: Invicti is praised for its affordable setup and quick return on investment. Coverity, despite higher initial costs, provides substantial long-term value through its advanced toolset. Invicti shines in cost-effectiveness, while Coverity's investment is justified by its comprehensive capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed Coverity vs. Invicti Report (Updated: December 2024).

Coverity vs. Invicti

Download the complete report

Helped 824,067 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Coverity

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

4th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Invicti

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

14th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

API Security (5th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 8.5%, up from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Invicti is 1.4%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Md. Shahriar Hussain

Cyber Security Chartered Engineer at Banglalink

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

Amr Abdelnaser

Senior Information Security Analyst at EastNets Holding Ltd.

A safe solution used to detective vulnerabilities for dynamic and complex testing

The Invicti is the scope application tool. The solution is installed on-premise but could be installed as a web version. Starting from the latest version, the web version could be used. They have a web application server. The deployment of the solution involves installing the EXE and configuring your machine.

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

"Coverity gives advisory and deviation features, which are some of the parts I liked."

"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 is that there were not a whole lot of false positives, at least on the codebases that I looked at."

"In my opinion, the most effective Coverity feature for identifying critical vulnerabilities is the extra checks, which offers deep analysis."

"It's very stable."

"Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."

"The reporting feature is up to the mark."

"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."

More Coverity pros

"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."

"This tool is really fast and the information that they provide on vulnerabilities is pretty good."

"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."

"The platform is stable."

"Netsparker has valuable features, including the ability to scan our website, an interactive approach, and security data integration."

"Netsparker provides a more interactive interface that is more appealing."

"It has a comprehensive resulting mechanism. It is a one-stop solution for all your security testing mechanisms."

"Scan, proxify the application, and then detailed report along with evidence and remediations to problems."

More Invicti pros

Cons

"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."

"Coverity concerns its dashboards and reporting."

"The tool needs to improve its reporting."

"When I put my code into Coverity for scanning, the code information of the product is in the system. The solution could be improved by providing a SBOM, a software bill of material."

"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."

"The level of vulnerability that this solution covers could be improved compared to other open source tools."

"There should be additional IDE support."

"The reporting tool integration process is sometimes slow."

More Coverity cons

"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."

"The licensing model should be improved to be more cost-effective. There are URL restrictions that consume our license. Compared to other DAST solutions and task tools like WebInspect and Burp Enterprise, Invicti is very expensive. The solution’s scanning time is also very long compared to other DAST tools. It might be due to proof-based scanning."

"It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities."

"The license could be better. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license. It's a major hindrance that we are facing while scanning applications, and we have to be sure that the URLs are the same and not different so that we do not end up consuming another license for it. Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. The licensing is tied to the URL, and it's restricted. If you have a URL that you scanned once, like a website, you cannot retry that same license. If you are scanning the same website but in a different domain or different URL, you might end up paying for a second license. It would also be better if they provided proper support for multi-factor authentications. In the next release, I would like them to include good multi-factor authentication support."

"The scannings are not sufficiently updated."

"The solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved."

"Currently, there is nothing I would like to improve."

"The custom attack preparation screen might be improved."

More Invicti cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."

"Coverity’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."

"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."

"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."

"Coverity is quite expensive."

"The price is competitive with other solutions."

"The tool was fairly priced."

More Coverity pricing and cost advice

"Invicti is best suited for large enterprises. I don't think small and medium-sized businesses can afford it. Maintenance costs aren't that great."

"Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license."

"It is competitive in the security market."

"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."

"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."

"We are using an NFR license and I do not know the exact price of the NFR license. I think 20 FQDN for three years would cost around 35,000 US Dollars."

"The price should be 20% lower"

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

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

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

32%

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Educational Organization

55%

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?

I do not know about the pricing.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?

As a technical user, I do not handle pricing or licensing, but I am aware that Invicti offers flexible licensing models based on organizational needs.

What do you like most about Invicti?

The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan.

What needs improvement with Invicti?

Currently, there is nothing I would like to improve.

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity

Comparisons

Compared 53% of the time

Klocwork vs Coverity

Compared 7% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

Veracode vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

More Coverity Competitors

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 16% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Invicti

Compared 16% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

Product Reports

Coverity

Download Coverity product report

Download Invicti product report

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis

Netsparker

Learn More

Black Duck

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.

Invicti helps DevSecOps teams automate security tasks and save hundreds of hours each month by identifying web vulnerabilities that matter. Combining dynamic with interactive testing (DAST + IAST) and software composition analysis (SCA), Invicti scans every corner of an app to find what other tools miss with 99.98% accuracy, delivering on the promise of Zero Noise AppSec. Invicti helps discover all web assets — even ones that are lost, forgotten, or created by rogue departments. With an array of out-of-the-box integrations, DevSecOps teams can get ahead of their workloads to hit critical deadlines, improve processes, and communicate more effectively while reducing risk and hitting the ROI goals.

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank

Coverity vs. Invicti