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

Coverity vs OWASP Zap 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:
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.0
Coverity's customer service is generally responsive and professional, but some users encounter communication delays and inconsistent expertise.
No sentiment score available
 

Room For Improvement

Sentiment score
3.7
Coverity users seek improved UI, better IDE integrations, reduced false positives, expanded language support, and enhanced reporting features.
No sentiment score available
The Coverity license fee is very high, making it tricky for individual developers.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
Coverity is praised for scalability, although some face cost issues; it efficiently serves both small and large organizations.
No sentiment score available
 

Setup Cost

Sentiment score
3.0
Coverity's pricing is perceived as expensive and complex, despite providing multi-language access without code limitations.
No sentiment score available
Coverity is considered expensive compared to other tools like SonarQube, which is much cheaper.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.5
Coverity is praised for its stability and reliability, with users rating its performance highly and noting minimal configurations needed.
No sentiment score available
 

Valuable Features

Sentiment score
8.2
Coverity enhances code quality with low false positives, security analysis, customizable options, and seamless integration into development workflows.
No sentiment score available
The most valuable feature of Coverity is its interprocedural analysis.
 

Categories and Ranking

Coverity
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OWASP Zap
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 8.4%, up from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 5.1%, down from 6.3% 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.
AnkithKumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Great for automating and testing and has tightened our security
I'd like to see more regular updates with new features and I'd like to see resources where users can internally access a learning module from the tool. It would be helpful for any user interested in developing their skills. They have all the built-ins but it's not user-friendly in the sense that the UI is not as easy as you'd find in a solution such as the Burp Suite.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 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%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
 

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.
Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
What do you like most about OWASP Zap?
The best feature is the Zap HUD (Heads Up Display) because the customers can use the website normally. If we scan websites with automatic scanning, and the website has a web application firewall, i...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
1. Google 2. Microsoft 3. IBM 4. Amazon 5. Facebook 6. Twitter 7. LinkedIn 8. Netflix 9. Adobe 10. PayPal 11. Salesforce 12. Cisco 13. Oracle 14. Intel 15. HP 16. Dell 17. VMware 18. Symantec 19. McAfee 20. Citrix 21. Red Hat 22. Juniper Networks 23. SAP 24. Accenture 25. Deloitte 26. Ernst & Young 27. PwC 28. KPMG 29. Capgemini 30. Infosys 31. Wipro 32. TCS
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.