Polyspace Code Prover vs SonarQube comparison

MathWorks and SonarSource Sàrl are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. MathWorks is ranked #26 with an average rating of 6.3, while SonarSource Sàrl is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.2. MathWorks holds a 1.3% mindshare in AS, compared to SonarSource Sàrl’s 16.9% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of MathWorks users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of SonarSource Sàrl users who would recommend it.

Polyspace Code Prover

Read 7 Polyspace Code Prover reviews

2,457 Views
1,794 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

SonarQube

Read 134 SonarQube reviews

38,374 Views
26,862 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Polyspace Code Prover

SonarQube

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 2025

SonarQube and Polyspace Code Prover both compete in the software quality assurance market. SonarQube is preferred for its comprehensive code quality management across multiple programming languages and strong community support, whereas Polyspace Code Prover offers critical safety checks ideal for the automotive industry.

Features:SonarQube supports over 20 programming languages, enabling extensive code analysis. It integrates well with diverse tools and systems, providing quality profiles and open-source advantages for continuous quality improvement. Meanwhile, Polyspace Code Prover focuses on code correctness and safety, particularly for the automotive sector, ensuring compliance with standards like ISO 26262 and detecting functional issues like overflows and invalid accesses without needing extra tools.

Room for Improvement:SonarQube could enhance its security scanning capabilities, interface intuitiveness, and reduce false positives. It also faces challenges in configuration complexity. Polyspace Code Prover requires improvements in scalability for larger systems, overall execution speed, and better documentation for constraint usage and CI integration.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service:SonarQube offers flexible deployment options including on-premises, hybrid, and cloud, with active community support although response times may vary. Polyspace Code Prover is mainly on-premises and public cloud, with support primarily through official documentation and expert consultations.

Pricing and ROI:SonarQube provides a free open-source edition and affordable paid versions that include commercial plugins, making it valuable across organization sizes. Polyspace Code Prover, despite higher costs, is valued for its specialized safety functions, offering significant ROI in critical safety environments like automotive industries.

To learn more, read our detailed Polyspace Code Prover vs. SonarQube Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Polyspace Code Prover vs. SonarQube

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,707 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

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

SonarQube

Ranking in Application Security Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

134

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (1st), Software Development Analytics (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Polyspace Code Prover is 1.3%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube is 16.9%, down from 26.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
SonarQube	16.9%
Polyspace Code Prover	1.3%
Other	81.8%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

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

KarthikHarpanhalli

Sr Software Engineering Supervisor at Mozarc Medical

Gains control over rule customization and achieves reliable vulnerability assessment

The deployment process took me about 2 or 3 hours to deploy SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube), although I do not remember exactly since it was done about 2 years back. Currently, about 10 of my developers are using SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) in my company. I do not have plans to increase the usage of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) in the future as there will not be any requirement to increase. I am a senior software engineer and supervisor at Mozark Medical. My corporate email address is karthik.k.a.r.t.h.i.k.h.a.r.p.a.n.h.a.l.l.i@mozarkmedical.com. Overall, I would rate SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) as a 9 out of 10.

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

"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."

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

"The product detects memory corruptions."

"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."

"Before you even compile, it can catch known vulnerability issues or patterns."

"The SaaS solution for checking code without execution and dealing with security issues is valuable."

"I find SonarQube Cloud very easy to use and simple to integrate initially."

"The solution is stable."

"SonarQube is designed well making it easy to use, simple to identify issues and find solutions to problems."

"The overall quality of the indicator is good."

"One of the most valuable features of SonarQube is its ability to detect code quality during development. There are rules that define various technologies—Java, C#, Python, everything—and these rules declare the coding standards and code quality. With SonarQube, everything is detectable during the time of development and continuous integration, which is an advantage. SonarQube also has a Quality Gate, where the code should reach 85%. Below that, the code cannot be promoted to a further environment, it should be in a development environment only. So the checks are there, and SonarQube will provide that increase. It also provides suggestions on how the code can be fixed and methods of going about this, without allowing hackers to exploit the code. Another valuable feature is that it is tightly integrated with third-party tools. For example, we can see the SonarQube metrics in Bitbucket, the code repository. Once I raise the full request, the developer, team lead, or even the delivery lead can see the code quality metrics of the deliverable so that they can make a decision. SonarQube will also cover all of the top OWASP vulnerabilities, however it doesn't have penetration testing or hacker testing. We use other tools, like Checkmarx, to do penetration testing from the outside."

"This solution is simple to use and can be quickly deployed."

More SonarQube pros

Cons

"Automation could be a challenge."

"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."

"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."

"The tool has some stability issues."

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

"CI/CD pipeline is part of a whole chain of design, development, and production, and it's becoming increasingly crucial to optimize the various tools across different stages. However, it's still a silo approach because the full integration is missing. This isn't just an issue with SonarCloud. It's a general problem with tooling."

"I need a solution that can bring together three key areas: vulnerabilities, static scanning, and misarchitecture. Currently, to achieve our expectations, we have to use more than one product, as some products excel at scanning for vulnerabilities but are poor at checking code quality."

"The solution could improve by having better-consulting services."

"SonarQube could be improved with more dynamic testing—basically, now, it's a static code analysis scan. For example, when the developer writes the code and does the corresponding unit test, he can cover functional and non-functional. So the SonarQube could be improved by helping to execute unit tests and test dynamically, using various parameters, and to help detect any vulnerabilities. Currently, it'll just give the test case and say whether it passes or fails—it won't give you any other input or dynamic testing. They could use artificial intelligence to build a feature that would help developers identify and fix issues in the early stages, which would help us deliver the product and reduce costs. Another area with room for improvement is in regard to automating things, since the process currently needs to be done manually."

"SonarQube's detail in the security could be improved. It may be helpful to have additional details, with regards to Oracle PL/SQL. For example, it's neither as built nor as thorough as Java. For now, this is the only additional feature I would like to see."

"I would like to see improvements in defining the quality sets of rules and the quality to ensure code with low-performance does not end up in production."

"Expression of common vulnerabilities and exposures is not always current."

"The product must improve security analysis."

More SonarQube cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We use the paid version."

"I was using the Community Edition, which is available free of charge."

"The price of this solution is more expensive than competitors. However, it works better than competitors."

"A low cost long-term solution for non-critical situations."

"The solution has a free version and a license version. The license is priced reasonably, the cost of hiring one programmer is more expensive than the solution."

"My guess is that we have a yearly subscription. We use it quite extensively, so a monthly license wouldn't make sense. Yearly subscriptions are usually cheaper. In addition to the standard licensing fee, there is just the cost of running the hardware where it is hosted."

"We use the free version; there are no hidden costs or licensing required."

"The price of SonarCloud could be less expensive. We are using the community version and the price should be more reasonable."

"We did not purchase a license (required for C++ support), but this option was considered."

More SonarQube pricing and cost advice

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

881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

38%

Computer Software Company

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	41
Midsize Enterprise	24
Large Enterprise	79

Questions from the Community

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

Is SonarQube the best tool for static analysis?

I am not very familiar with SonarQube and their solutions, so I can not answer. But if you are asking me about which tools that are the best for for Static Code Analysis, I suggest you have a look...

See all answers

Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?

SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...

See all answers

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

Comparisons

Coverity Static vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 23% of the time

Klocwork vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 12% of the time

CodeSonar vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 9% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 6% of the time

Parasoft SOAtest vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 6% of the time

More Polyspace Code Prover Competitors

Checkmarx One vs SonarQube

Compared 28% of the time

Snyk vs SonarQube

Compared 9% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs SonarQube

Compared 6% of the time

Coverity Static vs SonarQube

Compared 5% of the time

Semgrep vs SonarQube

Compared 4% of the time

More SonarQube Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Polyspace Code Prover

January 2026

Download Polyspace Code Prover product report

Buyer's Guide

SonarQube

January 2026

Download SonarQube product report

Also Known As

No data available

Sonar, SonarQube Cloud

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

MathWorks

SonarSource Sàrl

Overview

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

SonarQube leads automated code review, enhancing code quality and security in AI-driven SDLCs. It analyzes pull requests, providing developers with actionable feedback and AI-driven fixes before code merges. Trusted by top enterprises, it supports SaaS and self-managed deployments.

SonarQube supports a wide range of programming languages and integrates seamlessly with CI/CD tools like Jenkins. It is renowned for its static code analysis, code coverage, and security vulnerability detection. While its open-source foundation and scalability are praised, users seek enhanced integration across multiple languages, better security features, and improved documentation. Despite challenges, its ability to automate code inspections and ensure compliance with coding standards makes it essential in software development processes, facilitating continuous improvement.

What are the most important features?

Language Support: Extensive support for multiple programming languages.
Custom Coding Rules: Allows defining project-specific rules.
Integration: Seamlessly works with Jenkins and CI/CD pipelines.
Quality Gates: Simplifies monitoring code quality.
Dashboards: Facilitates easy monitoring and management.
Static Code Analysis: Detects issues early in development.
Security Detection: Identifies vulnerabilities automatically.

What benefits should users look for?

Improved Code Quality: Enhances reliability and maintainability.
Security Assurance: Strengthens code against vulnerabilities.
Technical Debt Reduction: Ensures cleaner, maintainable code.
Efficient Feedback: Speeds up development cycles.
Standards Compliance: Aids in adhering to best practices.

In industries like finance, healthcare, and automotive, SonarQube is leveraged for static code analysis, automating code inspections, and ensuring compliance with stringent standards. Teams integrate it into their CI/CD pipelines to maintain high-quality code, identify security vulnerabilities, and enhance code maintainability.

SonarSource Sàrl

Sample Customers

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

Snowflake, Booking.com, Deutsche Bank, AstraZeneca, and Ford Motor Company.

Buyer's Guide

Polyspace Code Prover vs. SonarQube

February 2026

Free Report: Polyspace Code Prover vs. SonarQube

Find out what your peers are saying about Polyspace Code Prover vs. SonarQube and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Polyspace Code Prover vs. SonarQube 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.