Coverity vs Kiuwan comparison

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

1,350 Views
1,036 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Coverity

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Kiuwan and Coverity are notable tools in the code analysis category. Coverity has an upper hand due to its comprehensive features and superior functionality.

Features: Kiuwan provides a cloud-based architecture, facilitating integration and workflow streamlining. It offers responsive support and competitive pricing. Coverity is praised for its static analysis, detailed reporting, and a robust feature set, enhancing its value proposition.

Room for Improvement: Kiuwan could improve detailed reporting, expand customization options, and enhance user interface usability. Coverity might focus on developing better documentation, increasing update speed, and improving accessibility.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Kiuwan is easy to deploy, supported by excellent customer service, aiding swift issue resolution. Coverity has a more complex installation process but also offers strong customer support. There is potential for Coverity to refine its deployment model for a smoother experience.

Pricing and ROI: Kiuwan is seen as cost-effective, providing high ROI through lower setup costs and efficient operations. Coverity, with a higher initial cost, justifies its pricing with advanced features and long-term benefits, offering a favorable ROI based on its capability set.

To learn more, read our detailed Coverity vs. Kiuwan Report (Updated: April 2025).

Coverity vs. Kiuwan

Download the complete report

Helped 846,617 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

Kiuwan

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

24th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (28th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 8.0%, up from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.0%, up from 0.9% 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

Mustufa Bhavnagarwala

CyberRisk Solution Advisor at Deloitte

Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement

Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran the tool and tried to scan the repository to find the security issues. The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required.

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

"What I find most effective about Coverity is its low rate of false positives. I've seen other platforms with many false positives, but with Coverity, most vulnerabilities it identifies are genuine. This allows me to focus on real issues."

"It help us identify the latest security vulnerabilities."

"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"

"The interface of Coverity is quite good, and it is also easy to use."

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

"The tool as it is can be used for code quality improvement."

"It has the lowest false positives."

"The ability to scan code gives us details of existing and potential vulnerabilities. What really matters for us is to ensure that we are able to catch vulnerabilities ahead of time."

More Coverity pros

"The feature that I have found the most valuable in Kiuwan is the speed of scanning. Compared to other SaaS tools I have used, Kiuwan is much quicker in performing scans. I have not yet used it on a large code base, but from what I have experienced, it is efficient and accurate. Additionally, I have used it both manually and in an automated pipeline, and both methods have been effective. The speed of scanning is what makes it valuable to me."

"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."

"The solution has a continuous integration process."

"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."

"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."

"I've found the reporting features the most helpful."

"We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."

"We are using this solution to increase the quality of our software and to test the vulnerabilities in our tools before the customers find them."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"SCM integration is very poor in Coverity."

"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."

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

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

"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."

"Coverity is not stable."

"The setup takes very long."

"Sometimes it's a bit hard to figure out how to use the product’s UI."

More Coverity cons

"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."

"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."

"The development-to-delivery phase."

"It could improve its scalability abilities."

"Perhaps more languages supported."

"I would like to see better integration with the Visual Studio and Eclipse IDEs."

"The QA developer and security could be improved."

"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Coverity is quite expensive."

"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."

"It is expensive."

"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."

"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."

"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."

"Coverity is very expensive."

More Coverity pricing and cost advice

"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."

"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."

"Check with your account manager."

"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."

"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."

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

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

33%

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Insurance Company

Comms Service Provider

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?

I do not know about the pricing.

What do you like most about Kiuwan?

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kiuwan?

I'm not entirely sure about the price and business aspects, but I assume Checkmarx might be less expensive. I think Checkmarx might offer more affordable options, especially in its smaller business...

What needs improvement with Kiuwan?

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity

Comparisons

Compared 50% of the time

Klocwork vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

Veracode vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

More Coverity Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Kiuwan

Compared 54% of the time

Snyk vs Kiuwan

Compared 10% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 9% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan

Compared 9% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Kiuwan

Compared 5% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Coverity

Download Coverity product report

Download Kiuwan product report

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis

No data available

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.

Black Duck

Software analytics technology with a breadth of third party integrations that takes into account the wealth of applications your teams are currently using.

We facilitate and encourage work between unlocalized teams. We understand the complexity of working on multi technology environments, constantly striving to increase the number of programming languages and technologies we support.

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space

DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial

Coverity vs. Kiuwan