No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

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 (15th), API Security (20th)
SonarQube
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
137
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 0.9%, up 0.1% compared to last year.
SonarQube, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 11.8% mindshare, down 23.4% since last year.
Internet Security Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Seeker Interactive0.9%
Zscaler Internet Access27.2%
Cisco Umbrella27.0%
Other44.900000000000006%
Internet Security
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SonarQube11.8%
Checkmarx One8.0%
Snyk5.1%
Other75.1%
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.
Vitthal Gole - PeerSpot reviewer
Devops Engineer at AIQOD
Automated code checks have improved quality gates and prevent weak code from reaching production
SonarQube could improve by reducing false positives in its static code analysis; while its detection capabilities are strong, some findings require manual verification, increasing developers' workload. More accurate analysis would enhance productivity, and SonarQube would benefit from enhanced AI-powered recommendations for fixing issues. For instance, in our pipeline, if it fails during SonarQube stage, we could check the dashboard for identified issues involving code smells, bugs, or duplicacy. An AI feature should be integrated into SonarQube to resolve issues quickly; optimizing scanning performance for very large repositories and providing faster analysis times would enhance the developer experience, especially in large code bases with frequent commits. For anyone planning to implement SonarQube, I advise starting by defining coding standards first and integrating Quality Gates into the pipeline. You can customize quality profiles to match project requirements; rather than relying entirely on default rules, you can adjust settings for stronger detection and enforcement. Organizations with advanced security, branch analysis, and governance features might consider commercial editions based on their needs.

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., and furthermore, with Seeker, we are finding more and more valid (i.e. "true") positives over time compared with the dynamic scanners."
"SonarQube lets us find security issues during development and testing so that we can release more secure and higher quality applications."
"SonarQube is one of the more popular solutions because it supports 29 languages."
"SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) is very stable."
"We advise all of our developers to have this solution in place."
"The product itself has a friendly UI."
"I have fallen in love with SonarQube when I could've easily built custom rules checks."
"SonarQube does SAST and SCAs pretty well."
"The reporting and the results are quick. It gets integrated within the pipeline well."
 

Cons

"All in all, the enterprise server installation is very easy and straightforward, but with the agent installation you might face problems up to 50% of the time for a variety of reasons, depending on what type of application is involved, the type of deployment used, and so on."
"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."
"Product is good, but the API documentation is poor, when it exists at all."
"The exporting capabilities could be improved. Currently, exporting is fully dependent on the SonarQube environment."
"SonarQube Cloud could improve its vulnerability detection compared to Veracode. Additionally, it has fewer capabilities, which prompted us to use Veracode."
"The time it took for me to do the whole process was approximately two hours because I had to download, read the documentation, and do the configurations."
"Executing sonar analysis on a big chunk of code with an Oracle database does take up a lot of time."
"SonarQube needs to improve its ease of use, integration with third-party platforms, and scalability."
"The learning curve can be fairly steep at first, but then, it's not an entry-level type of application."
"Having performance regression would be a helpful add on or ability to be able to do during the scan."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing for Seeker is user-based and for 50 users I believe it costs about $70,000 per year."
"The developer edition is based on cost per lines of code."
"It's an open-source product."
"On the pricing side, it's 3,000 Euros for 1 million lines of code."
"We are using the open-source community version, but there are enterprise licenses available."
"We are using the Developer Edition and the cost is based on the amount of code that is being processed."
"I am satisfied with the pricing."
"The licence is standard open source licensing"
"It is very expensive. Its price should be improved."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Internet Security solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Government
16%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise24
Large Enterprise80
 

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: July 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.