CodeSonar vs Polyspace Code Prover comparison

CodeSecure and MathWorks are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. CodeSecure is ranked #28, while MathWorks is ranked #26 with an average rating of 6.3. CodeSecure holds a 1.2% mindshare in AS, compared to MathWorks’s 1.4% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of CodeSecure users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 85% of MathWorks users who would recommend it.

CodeSonar

Read 7 CodeSonar reviews

2,608 Views
1,800 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Polyspace Code Prover

Read 7 Polyspace Code Prover reviews

2,329 Views
1,677 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

CodeSonar

Polyspace Code Prover

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Polyspace Code Prover and CodeSonar compete in the static code analysis category. CodeSonar seems to have the upper hand due to its broader defect detection capabilities, appealing to projects with diverse requirements.

Features: Polyspace Code Prover provides strong proof of code correctness, making it ideal for mission-critical systems. It is praised for its analytical capabilities and straightforward deployment. CodeSonar is recognized for its comprehensive defect detection, offering extensive coverage and flexible deployment options.

Room for Improvement: Polyspace Code Prover could enhance performance speed on large projects and refine its deployment efficiency. Users suggest more responsive customer support. CodeSonar could improve its learning curve and enhance deployment options. Users also mention the need for better customer service responsiveness.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Polyspace Code Prover is noted for its straightforward deployment and effective customer support. CodeSonar offers flexible deployment but receives mixed feedback on customer service responsiveness.

Pricing and ROI: Polyspace Code Prover's pricing aligns well with its robust verification, offering a good ROI in safety-critical domains. CodeSonar users justify its cost by its defect detection capabilities, although setup costs can be high.

To learn more, read our detailed CodeSonar vs. Polyspace Code Prover Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

CodeSonar vs. Polyspace Code Prover

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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

CodeSonar

Ranking in Application Security Tools

28th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Code Analysis (11th)

Polyspace Code Prover

Ranking in Application Security Tools

26th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

2.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of CodeSonar is 1.2%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polyspace Code Prover is 1.4%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Polyspace Code Prover	1.4%
CodeSonar	1.2%
Other	97.4%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Mathieu ALBRESPY

Intigration Developer at ez-Wheel

Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand

This is the first time I've used this kind of software. It was the only one we could apply to analyze with MISRA rules. At my new company, I tried to use Klocwork. I tried to use it, just once so I cannot compare it exactly with CodeSonar. I also have a plugin for my Visual Studio and I try to make it work. It's not easy, however, I don't think that we have this kind of functionality with CodeSonar. It can do some incremental analysis. However, since this feature is also available on CodeSonar, it would be a good idea to have a plugin on Visual Studio just to have a quick analysis.

Read full review

reviewer2760282

General Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Has struggled with performance and integration but supports critical safety verification

Execution speed of the tests and generally the integration into AWS-driven CI work chains or workflows represent how it can be improved in my opinion. Performance issues plus license costs are two main driving factors. The CI environments that we use employ up to around 40,000 virtual CPUs per day in peak, running at the same time. We always have problems distributing licenses accordingly with other products. I can talk to the experts doing the integration, but as far as I know, I was involved with Polyspace Code Prover and we had a lot of difficulties integrating it into our Bazel-driven CI toolchain, plus integrating it on the AWS environments in Linux that we use. It was much more straightforward using Code Sonar there. The reason is the execution speed, integration with Azure and stuff, and pricing. The CI integration and maybe a better-suited license model for CI-driven execution are other areas I recommend improving. That's something we discussed with all of the software companies whose products we use, such as compilers. We have a lot of parallel builds, and each call to a license server is actually problematic in the long run.

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

"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."

"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."

"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."

"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."

"It has been able to scale."

"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."

"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."

"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."

"The product detects memory corruptions."

"Efficiency and speed are the advantages I see in Code Sonar over Polyspace Code Prover."

"The outputs are very reliable."

"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."

"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."

Cons

"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."

"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."

"It was expensive."

"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."

"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."

"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."

"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."

"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."

"Because we had difficulties in efficiently integrating Polyspace Code Prover into our CI toolchain, these tests are mostly run manually and only occasionally."

"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."

"Automation could be a challenge."

"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."

"The tool has some stability issues."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."

"The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools."

"The solution's price depends on the number of licenses needed and the source code for the project."

"Pricing is a bit costly."

"We use the paid version."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

25%

University

11%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

38%

Computer Software Company

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	2

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	6

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Polyspace Code Prover?

When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts,...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Polyspace Code Prover?

We use the paid version.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Polyspace Code Prover?

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs CodeSonar

Compared 33% of the time

Coverity Static vs CodeSonar

Compared 22% of the time

Helix QAC vs CodeSonar

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs CodeSonar

Compared 4% of the time

Understand vs CodeSonar

Compared 3% of the time

More CodeSonar Competitors

Coverity Static vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 24% of the time

SonarQube vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 18% of the time

Klocwork vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 14% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 6% of the time

Parasoft SOAtest vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 5% of the time

More Polyspace Code Prover Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

January 2026

Download CodeSonar product report

Buyer's Guide

Polyspace Code Prover

January 2026

Download Polyspace Code Prover product report

Overview

GrammaTech enables organizations to develop software applications more efficiently, on-budget, and on-schedule by helping to eliminate harmful defects that can cause system failures, enable data breaches, and ultimately increase corporate liabilities in today’s connected world. GrammaTech is the developer of CodeSonar, the most powerful source and binary code analysis solution available today. Extraordinarily precise, CodeSonar finds, on average, 2 times more serious defects in software than other static analysis solutions. Designed for organizations with zero tolerance for defects and vulnerabilities in their applications, CodeSonar provides static analysis for applications where reliability and security are paramount - widely used by software developers in avionics, medical, automotive, industrial control, and other mission-critical applications. Some of GrammaTech's customers include Toyota, GE, Hyundai, Kawasaki, LG, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Northrop Grumman, Panasonic, and Samsung.

CodeSecure

Polyspace Code Prover is a sound static analysis tool that proves the absence of overflow, divide-by-zero, out-of-bounds array access, and certain other run-time errors in C and C++ source code. It produces results without requiring program execution, code instrumentation, or test cases. Polyspace Code Prover uses semantic analysis and abstract interpretation based on formal methods to verify software interprocedural, control, and data flow behavior. You can use it on handwritten code, generated code, or a combination of the two. Each operation is color-coded to indicate whether it is free of run-time errors, proven to fail, unreachable, or unproven.

MathWorks

Sample Customers

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY

Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center

Buyer's Guide

CodeSonar vs. Polyspace Code Prover

December 2025

Free Report: CodeSonar vs. Polyspace Code Prover

Find out what your peers are saying about CodeSonar vs. Polyspace Code Prover and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CodeSonar vs. Polyspace Code Prover report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.

We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.