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

Coverity vs Tenable Security Center comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (5th)
Tenable Security Center
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
54
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (10th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Coverity and Tenable Security Center aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Coverity is designed for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and holds a mindshare of 7.2%, up 6.7% compared to last year.
Tenable Security Center, on the other hand, focuses on Risk-Based Vulnerability Management, holds 11.6% mindshare, down 23.1% since last year.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Risk-Based Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

Jaile Sebes - PeerSpot reviewer
Resolving critical software issues demands faster implementation and better integration
We use Coverity primarily to find issues such as software bugs and memory leaks, especially in C++ and C# projects. It helps us identify deadlocks, synchronization issues, and product crashes Coverity has been instrumental in resolving product crashes by detecting various issues like deadlocks.…
OndrejKOVAC - PeerSpot reviewer
Empower clients with risk-based vulnerability management through continuous workflow and valuable insights
Tenable Security Center could improve by implementing more dynamic data displays and translating reports into European languages. This is especially relevant in Central Eastern Europe, where clients often require reports in local languages. Additionally, the licensing model could be more flexible for managed security providers, similar to a pay-as-you-go model.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's very stable."
"Considering the analysis part and the benchmarking process involving the product that my company carried out, the solution is good for finding bugs and violations"
"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
"This solution is easy to use."
"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."
"The tool as it is can be used for code quality improvement."
"I like Coverity's capability to scan codes once we push it. We don't need more time to review our colleagues' codes. Its UI is pretty straightforward."
"In my opinion, the most effective Coverity feature for identifying critical vulnerabilities is the extra checks, which offers deep analysis."
"Feature-wise, Tenable Security Center is a very fast tool with many dashboards and reports, and it covers all our systems."
"It basically reviews our threat landscape vulnerability."
"The most valuable feature is the automatic and periodic management of security scans, along with the ability to consolidate all information into a single dashboard."
"This product has the best results in terms of the lowest number of false-positives and false-negatives."
"The valauble feature is compliance reporting system."
"The initial setup process is simple."
"The product is our second solution, and we are happy that it meets our requirements."
"The most valuable features in Tenable SC are scanning and analysis."
 

Cons

"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."
"Zero-day vulnerability identification can be an add-on feature that Coverity can provide."
"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."
"SCM integration is very poor in Coverity."
"The setup takes very long."
"The solution could use more rules."
"Its price can be improved. Price is always an issue with Synopsys."
"We use GitHub and Gitflow, and Coverity does not fit with Gitflow. I have to create a screen for our branches, and it's a pain for developers. It has been difficult to integrate Coverity with our system."
"We experienced some difficulties with the solution’s support."
"The reporting side can be improved. The dashboards are nice, but exporting things out for reports for management was a little tough."
"I will say it's a lot slower compared to an MS scan. It takes so much longer, so the performance could definitely be worked on."
"In terms of configuration, there is some level of flexibility that we are not able to achieve."
"The integration is very good, although it still needs to improve."
"Though the solution's technical support is responsive, they do take a lot of time, making it one of the solution's shortcomings that needs improvement."
"The vulnerability scan does not work correctly until the access privileges are set by the system administrator."
"The biggest issue I have with the solution is when I'm using the scanning it picks up the original DNS of that device. That means, before we image it and actually change the DNS to something within our company structure, it'll just be random numbers and letters and Tenable will stick to that DNS for a long time."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is affordable."
"Coverity is quite expensive."
"It is expensive."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"Coverity is very expensive."
"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 pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"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."
"For 500 users the licensing fee is roughly $100,000."
"I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten, where ten is expensive. It is the most expensive tool my company is using."
"We're able to save because we don't have to employ more staff members to help wit ht he scheduling of the scans, running the reports or sending them out to the systems owners. That alone is a big ROI for us."
"We pay around 60,000 on a yearly basis."
"This solution's price is quite high."
"It is slightly more expensive than other solutions in the same sphere."
"We're a Fortune 500 company... our licensing costs [are] in the seven figures."
"The price of Tenable SC is expensive, we pay approximately €70,000 for the license annually. We have to pay for each IP test. The cost of other solutions is far less, such as Nessus Professional, which is €3,000 annually."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
32%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
4%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

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 Tenable SC?
The tool's dashboard and reporting capabilities match our company's needs since we are able to modify the basic view to create a new dashboard, and it works out very well for our needs.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tenable SC?
Tenable Security Center is quite expensive, particularly for the CEE region, causing us to lose cases due to its pricing. The licensing requirements can be prohibitive for managed security service ...
What needs improvement with Tenable SC?
Tenable Security Center could improve by implementing more dynamic data displays and translating reports into European languages. This is especially relevant in Central Eastern Europe, where client...
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
Tenable.sc, Tenable Unified Security, Tenable SecurityCenter
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
IBM, Sempra Energy, Microsoft, Apple, Adidas, Union Pacific
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: July 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.