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

Seeker Interactive vs SonarQube 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

Seeker Interactive
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (16th), Mobile Threat Defense (14th), API Security (17th)
SonarQube
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
134
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (1st), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (1st), Software Development Analytics (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

Seeker Interactive and SonarQube aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Seeker Interactive is designed for Internet Security and holds a mindshare of 1.1%, up 0.0% compared to last year.
SonarQube, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 16.9% mindshare, down 26.3% since last year.
Internet Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Seeker Interactive1.1%
Cisco Umbrella30.4%
Zscaler Internet Access28.8%
Other39.7%
Internet Security
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SonarQube16.9%
Checkmarx One9.9%
Snyk5.6%
Other67.6%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

San K - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Group Leader at Infosys
More effective than dynamic scanners, but is missing useful learning capabilities
One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need. The purposes for which applications are designed may differ in practice in the industry, and because of this, there will always be tools that sometimes report false positives. Thus, there should be some means with which I can customize the way that Seeker learns about our applications, possibly by using some kind of AI / ML capability within the tool that will automatically reduce the number of false positives that we get as we use the tool over time. Obviously, when we first start using the scanning tool there will be false positives, but as it keeps going and as I keep using the tool, there should be a period of time where either the application can learn how to ignore false positives, or I can customize it do so. Adding this type of functionality would definitely prevent future issues when it comes to reporting false positives, and this is a key area that we have already asked the vendor to improve on, in general. On a different note, there is one feature that isn't completely available right now where you can integrate Seeker with an open-source vulnerability scanner or composition analysis tool such as Black Duck. I would very much like this capability to be available to us out-of-the-box, so that we can easily integrate with tools like Black Duck in such a way that any open source components that are used in the front-end are easily identified. I think this would be a huge plus for Seeker. Another feature within Seeker which could benefit from improvement is active verification, which lets you actively verify a vulnerability. This feature currently doesn't work in certain applications, particularly in scenarios where you have requested tokens. When we bought the tool, we didn't realize this and we were not told about it by the vendor, so initially it was a big challenge for us to overcome it and properly begin our deployment.
KH
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"A significant advantage of Seeker is that it is an interactive scanner, and we have found it to be much more effective in reducing the amount of false positives than dynamic scanners such as AppScan, Micro Focus Fortify, etc. Furthermore, with Seeker, we are finding more and more valid (i.e. "true") positives over time compared with the dynamic scanners."
"It is working fine. It provides a good value for money."
"Integrate it into the developers' workbench so that they can bench check their code against what will be done in the server-based audit version."
"The tool helps us to monitor and manage violations. It manages the bugs and security violations."
"It provides you with many features, as it does with the premium model, but there are still extra features that can be purchased if needed."
"Issue Explanations: Documentation with detailed samples. Helps in growing technical knowledge and re-writing logic to conforming solutions."
"Code Convention: Using the tool to implement some sort of coding convention is really useful and ensures that the code is consistent no matter how many contributors."
"The good thing with SonarQube is it covers a lot of issues, it's a very robust framework."
"I like that it covers most programming languages for source code review."
 

Cons

"One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need."
"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."
"There are limitations to the free version that limit development options as far as languages."
"The reporting is good, but I am not able to download a specific report as a PDF, so downloading reports is something that should be looked at."
"I am not very pleased with the technical debt computation."
"I don't believe you can have metrics of code quality based upon code analysis. I don't think it's possible for a computer to do it."
"SonarQube needs to improve its support model. They do not work 24/7, and they do not provide weekend support in case things go wrong. They only have a standard 8:00 am to 5:00 pm support model in which you have to raise a support ticket and wait. The support model is not effective for premium customers."
"The pricing could be reduced a bit. It's a little expensive."
"The product needs to integrate other security tools for security scanning."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing for Seeker is user-based and for 50 users I believe it costs about $70,000 per year."
"I was using the Community Edition, which is available free of charge."
"It's an open-source solution, with no additional costs."
"People can try the free licenses and later can seek buying plugins/support, etc. once they started liking it."
"I rate the pricing a five out of ten."
"The developer edition is based on cost per lines of code."
"It's a bit expensive for us. The currency rate of the dollar is a problem but it may be fine for other countries."
"We use the free version; there are no hidden costs or licensing required."
"The development license cost is reasonable, and we've had no concerns about SonarQube when it comes to cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Internet Security solutions are best for your needs.
881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
25%
Government
17%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise79
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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...
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...
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...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Sonar, SonarQube Cloud
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

El Al Airlines and Société Française du Radiotelephone
Snowflake, Booking.com, Deutsche Bank, AstraZeneca, and Ford Motor Company.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Zscaler, iboss and others in Internet Security. Updated: January 2026.
881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.