$ git diff main -- vs/sonarqube-vs-deepsource.md
commit a1b2c3d - author: Oliver Wakefield-Smith - verified 21 Jun 2026
For pure rule-based SAST with AI augmentation: SonarQubesrcremains the enterprise default thanks to LOC-based licensing and the AI Code Assurance add-on. DeepSource ($12/contributor/mosrc) wins on per-contributor cost and Autofix accuracy for mid-size teams.
@@ pricing axes @@not directly comparable
1-SonarQube Server: per-LOC. SonarQube Cloud Team: $11/user/mo.
2+DeepSource: $12/contributor/mo (cloud), enterprise self-host quote-only.
3At 50 devs / 1M LOC DeepSource cloud is roughly $600/mo. SonarQube Cloud Team at 50 users is $550/mo. SonarQube Server pricing depends on edition (Developer / Enterprise / Data Center) and LOC bucket.
@@ autofix accuracy @@qualitative
1+DeepSource: Autofix promoted to default in 2025. High accept-rate on common defect patterns.
2+SonarQube: AI Code Assurance does suggestion-style fixes; less aggressive than DeepSource Autofix.
@@ PR-blocking gate @@ci integration
1Both publish PR status checks that can block merge. SonarQube's Quality Gates concept is the more mature governance surface. DeepSource's blocking is per-rule.
@@ migration path @@when to switch
1From DeepSource to SonarQube: usually upmarket pressure (LOC-licensing accommodates the largest estates). Migration is a re-onboarding of rule sets, 2-4 weeks for a 1M LOC repo.
2From SonarQube to DeepSource: usually a cost-cut. Per-contributor pricing makes sense once nominal team size detaches from active committers.
@@ cross-links @@related
1/tool/sonarqube
2/tool/deepsource
3/deployment/self-hosted