Coverity vs Kiuwan comparison

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

1,471 Views
1,169 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Coverity

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Kiuwan and Coverity are notable tools in the code analysis category. Coverity has an upper hand due to its comprehensive features and superior functionality.

Features: Kiuwan provides a cloud-based architecture, facilitating integration and workflow streamlining. It offers responsive support and competitive pricing. Coverity is praised for its static analysis, detailed reporting, and a robust feature set, enhancing its value proposition.

Room for Improvement: Kiuwan could improve detailed reporting, expand customization options, and enhance user interface usability. Coverity might focus on developing better documentation, increasing update speed, and improving accessibility.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Kiuwan is easy to deploy, supported by excellent customer service, aiding swift issue resolution. Coverity has a more complex installation process but also offers strong customer support. There is potential for Coverity to refine its deployment model for a smoother experience.

Pricing and ROI: Kiuwan is seen as cost-effective, providing high ROI through lower setup costs and efficient operations. Coverity, with a higher initial cost, justifies its pricing with advanced features and long-term benefits, offering a favorable ROI based on its capability set.

To learn more, read our detailed Coverity vs. Kiuwan Report (Updated: January 2025).

Coverity vs. Kiuwan

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

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

Kiuwan

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

15th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (19th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 8.3%, up from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.0%, down from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Md. Shahriar Hussain

Information Security Analyst 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

Anshul Anshul

Sr. Manager at Wipro Limited

Efficient and accurate scanning, and detailed analysis

In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further. Another issue I've encountered is that Kiuwan only looks at the version of components and doesn't take into account any workaround fixes that have been implemented at the code level. This can result in false positives being reported. Additionally, these issues are in the "insights" tab and not in the code base security aspect. Lastly, when muting findings that are false positives, there should be an option to see the only available at the code level rather than at the organization level because it can lead to missing vulnerabilities if they are muted at the org level. An additional feature that would be helpful is the ability to easily download reports from Kiuwan. Specifically, in the "insights" tab, we have been encountering an error when trying to download the PDF report. We are able to download the code-based security report, but not the insights report. This has been an ongoing issue for the past couple of months and would be beneficial if it could be resolved. My main recommendation would be to address the issues with downloading reports that we have been experiencing. Additionally, it would be helpful if Kiuwan could support a wider range of programming languages, as there are currently some that are not compatible with the tool. If the code of a particular application falls under the category which is not compatible with Kiuwan, then it will not be able to scan it.

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

"The ability to scan code gives us details of existing and potential vulnerabilities. What really matters for us is to ensure that we are able to catch vulnerabilities ahead of time."

"The solution has helped to increase staff productivity and improved our work significantly by approximately 20 percent."

"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 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."

"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."

"Coverity integrates with issue-tracking systems like Jira and provides email notifications, alerts, and other features."

"We were very comfortable with the initial setup."

"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."

More Coverity pros

"Lifecycle features, because they permit us to show non-technical people the risk and costs hidden into the code due to bad programming practices."

"We are using this solution to increase the quality of our software and to test the vulnerabilities in our tools before the customers find them."

"I've found the reporting features the most helpful."

"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."

"Software analytics for a lot of different languages including ABAP."

"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."

"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."

"The solution has a continuous integration process."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"Coverity is not stable."

"Coverity is not a user-friendly product."

"The reporting tool integration process is sometimes slow."

"Its price can be improved. Price is always an issue with Synopsys."

"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."

"Ideally, it would have a user-based license that does not have a restriction in the number of lines of code."

"Right now, the Coverity executable is around 1.2GB to download. If they can reduce it to approximately 600 or 700MB, that would be great. If they decrease the executable, it will be much easier to work in an environment like Docker."

"There is an extra step in my organization that involves uploading to servers, which adds overhead."

More Coverity cons

"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."

"It could improve its scalability abilities."

"The configuration hasn't been that good."

"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."

"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."

"Integration of the programming tools could be improved."

"I would like to see additional languages supported."

"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is competitive with other solutions."

"It is expensive."

"Coverity is very expensive."

"The tool was fairly priced."

"The solution is affordable."

"Depending on the usage types, one has to opt for different types of licenses from Coverity, especially to be able to use areas like report viewing or report generation."

"Offers varying prices for different companies"

"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."

More Coverity pricing and cost advice

"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."

"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."

"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."

"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."

"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."

"Check with your account manager."

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

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

Government

Financial Services Firm

16%

Computer Software Company

15%

Comms Service Provider

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 do you like most about Kiuwan?

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kiuwan?

I'm not entirely sure about the price and business aspects, but I assume Checkmarx might be less expensive. I think Checkmarx might offer more affordable options, especially in its smaller business...

What needs improvement with Kiuwan?

Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran...

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

Veracode vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

More Coverity Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Kiuwan

Compared 55% of the time

Snyk vs Kiuwan

Compared 11% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 10% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan

Compared 8% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Kiuwan

Compared 5% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Coverity

Download Coverity product report

Download Kiuwan product report

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis

No data available

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.

Software analytics technology with a breadth of third party integrations that takes into account the wealth of applications your teams are currently using.

We facilitate and encourage work between unlocalized teams. We understand the complexity of working on multi technology environments, constantly striving to increase the number of programming languages and technologies we support.

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space

DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial

Coverity vs. Kiuwan