Coverity vs OWASP Zap comparison

Black Duck and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Black Duck is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while OWASP is ranked #7 with an average rating of 7.6. Black Duck holds a 8.3% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 5.2% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Black Duck users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of OWASP users who would recommend it.

Coverity

Read 42 Coverity reviews

13,201 Views
9,033 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 38 OWASP Zap reviews

13,584 Views
6,879 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Coverity

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

OWASP Zap and Coverity are top contenders in application security testing. Users prefer OWASP Zap for its cost-effectiveness, while Coverity is valued for advanced features despite higher costs.

Features: OWASP Zap offers robust web application security, flexibility, and efficient vulnerability identification. Coverity provides sophisticated static analysis, extensive integration, and strength in large-scale project management.

Room for Improvement: OWASP Zap needs better scalability and integration. Coverity could simplify its setup and configuration. OWASP Zap would benefit from advanced features, whereas Coverity might become more user-friendly.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OWASP Zap has easy deployment and responsive support. Coverity offers detailed deployment but is complex in setup, compensating with effective technical issue resolution.

Pricing and ROI: OWASP Zap is cost-effective with strong ROI for smaller projects. Coverity, although expensive, is seen as a valuable investment for larger security requirements.

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

Buyer's Guide

Coverity vs. OWASP Zap

January 2025

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

OWASP Zap

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

7th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

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 OWASP Zap is 5.2%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Md. Shahriar Hussain

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

Amit Beniwal

Project Manager at Al Hassan LLC

Simplifies vulnerability discovery and has high quality support

There are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores. Sometimes, a vulnerability initially categorized as high severity may be reduced to medium or low over time after security patches are applied. This alignment with the present severity score and CVSS score could be improved.

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

"It help us identify the latest security vulnerabilities."

"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."

"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."

"Coverity is easy to set up and has a less lengthy process to find vulnerabilities."

"It's very stable."

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

"The product has deeper scanning capabilities."

"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."

More Coverity pros

"They offer free access to some other tools."

"Simple to use, good user interface."

"You can run it against multiple targets."

"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."

"We use the solution for security testing."

"It has improved my organization with faster security tests."

"Automatic updates and pull request analysis."

"The community edition updates services regularly. They add new vulnerabilities into the scanning list."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

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

"It should be easier to specify your own validation routines and sanitation routines."

"The product should include more customization options. The analytics is not as deep as compared to SonarQube."

"I would like to see integration with popular IDEs, such as Eclipse."

"We'd like it to be faster."

"There should be additional IDE support."

"Coverity concerns its dashboards and reporting."

"Coverity is not a user-friendly product."

More Coverity cons

"The reporting feature could be more descriptive."

"The automated vulnerability assessments that the application performs needs to be simplified as well as diversified."

"OWASP Zap needs to extend to mobile application testing."

"It needs more robust reporting tools."

"Online documentation can be improved to utilize all features of ZAP and API methods to make use in automation."

"It would be beneficial to enhance the algorithm to provide better summaries of automatic scanning results."

"The work that it does in the limited scope is good, but the scope is very limited in terms of the scanning features. The number of things it tests or finds is limited. They need to make it a more of a mainstream tool that people can use, and they can even think about having it on a proprietary basis. They need to increase the coverage of the scan and the results that it finds. That has always been Zap's limitation. Zap is a very good tool for a beginner, but once you start moving up the ladder where you want further details and you want your scan to show more in-depth results, Zap falls short because its coverage falls short. It does not have the capacity to do more."

"It would be a great improvement if they could include a marketplace to add extra features to the tool."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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 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."

"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."

"The solution's pricing is comparable to other products."

"The solution is affordable."

"This is a pretty expensive solution. The overall value of the solution could be improved if the price was reduced. Licensing is done on an annual basis."

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

More Coverity pricing and cost advice

"The tool is open-source."

"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."

"It's free. It's good for us because we don't know what the extent of our use will be yet. It's good to start with something free and easy to use."

"It's free and open, currently under the Apache 2 license. If ZAP does what you need it to do, selling a free solution is a very easy."

"This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."

"The solution’s pricing is high."

"OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate."

"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."

More OWASP Zap 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

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

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Government

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Coverity?

The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?

I do not know about the pricing.

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OWASP Zap?

The tool is open source.

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity

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 OWASP Zap

Compared 22% of the time

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 15% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap

Compared 10% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Coverity

January 2025

Download Coverity product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

January 2025

Download OWASP Zap product report

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis

No data available

Learn More

Black Duck

OWASP

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.

OWASP Zap is a free and open-source web application security scanner.

The solution helps developers identify vulnerabilities in their web applications by actively scanning for common security issues.

With its user-friendly interface and powerful features, Zap is a popular choice among developers for ensuring the security of their web applications.

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

Buyer's Guide

Coverity vs. OWASP Zap

January 2025

Free Report: Coverity vs. OWASP Zap

Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Coverity vs. OWASP Zap report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.