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

Coverity Static vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 21, 2025

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 Static
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (9th), Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity Static is 4.7%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 2.1%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional2.1%
Coverity Static4.7%
Other93.2%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

KT
Software Engineering Manager at Visteon Corporation
Using tools for compliance is beneficial but cost concerns persist
We have been using Coverity for quite a long period. It has been fine for our needs. I would rate Coverity between eight to nine, though the cost is high. I would rate their support from Coverity as six. That is the main complaint, but we still appreciate having it.
Arther Magaya - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Information Security at Aura
AI-driven analyses improve efficiency and reliability
I find all the features of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional most useful, particularly the AI enhancement for results and follow-up for retests. This feature helps me follow up on my results and perform retests step-by-step. The automation in AI verifies the findings, ensuring they are correct, and performs step-by-step testing. The Intruder tool enhances testing efficiency through intercepting information and analyzing it. It helps to analyze web applications and intercept the traffic.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
"The product has deeper scanning capabilities."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."
"It help us identify the latest security vulnerabilities."
"Coverity is easy to set up and has a less lengthy process to find vulnerabilities."
"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
""The product is very good just the way it is; It has everything already well established and functions great. I can't see any way for this current version to be improved.""
"The automated scan is what I find most useful because a lot of customers will need it. Not every domain will be looking for complete security, they just need a stamp on the security key. For these kinds of customers, the scan works really well."
"Enables automation of different tasks such as authorization testing."
"It offers flexibility, macros, and features to reduce the effort required for authenticated sessions."
"I am impressed with the tool's detailed analysis for penetration testing. AppScan can give only visibility, but it can't do the PT part. But the PortSwigger Burp Application can do both, and it gives much more visibility on the PT rating."
"It was easy to learn."
"The most valuable feature is Burp Collaborator."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite does not hamper the node of the server, and it does not shut down the server if it is running."
 

Cons

"We actually specified several checkers, but we found some checkers had a higher false positive rate. I think this is a problem. Because we have to waste some time is really the issue because the issue is not an issue. I mean, the tool pauses or an issue, but the same issue is the filter now.Some check checkers cannot find some issues, but sometimes they find issues that are not relevant, right, that are not really issues. Some customisation mechanism can be added in the next release so that we can define our Checker. The Modelling feature provided by Coverity helps in finding more information for potential issues but it is not mature enough, it should be mature. The fast testing feature for security testing campaign can be added as well. So if you correctly integrate it with the training team, maybe you can help us to find more potential issues."
"Some features are not performing well, like duplicate detection and switch case situations."
"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."
"They could improve the usability. For example, how you set things up, even though it's straightforward, it could be still be easier."
"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."
"There should be additional IDE support."
"When I put my code into Coverity for scanning, the code information of the product is in the system. The solution could be improved by providing a SBOM, a software bill of material."
"The quality of the code needs improvement."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional can improve by having more features in the free version for beginners to try."
"There should be a heads up display like the one available in OWASP Zap."
"The Burp Collaborator needs improvement. There also needs to be improved integration."
"If your application uses multi-factor authentication, registration management cannot be automated."
"The Iran market does not have after-sales support. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional needs to provide after-sales support."
"The pricing of the solution is quite high."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"The Initial setup is a bit complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 the tool's pricing a one out of ten."
"The solution is affordable."
"The price is competitive with other solutions."
"The solution's pricing is comparable to other products."
"Offers varying prices for different companies"
"The tool was fairly priced."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"It is a cheap solution, but it may not be cheaper than other solutions."
"At $400 or $500 per license paid annually, it is a very cheap tool."
"Burp Suite is affordable."
"There are different licenses available that include a free version."
"The solution is reasonably priced."
"The pricing of the solution is reasonable. We only need to pay for the annual subscription. I rate the pricing five out of ten."
"We have one license. The price is very nominal."
"The yearly cost is about $300."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
32%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Healthcare Company
4%
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise35
 

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 PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The solution helped us discover vulnerabilities in our applications.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The cost of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is reasonable at approximately $500 per year per user.
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
Burp
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity Static vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.