Side by side
Coverage.py vs Coverlet
Both stand on test coverage tools. Which one you can start free with, which one lets you read the code, and what each costs once you pay.
Free plan Open source APILinuxMac+2
Coverage.py provides several ways to measure and report Python test coverage, including optional branch coverage and test-specific contexts. Its sysmon core has narrower capabilities, so users needing contexts or plugins should note that limitation.
Visit Coverage.py Free plan LinuxMacWindows
Coverlet provides several .NET test and build integrations, with report formats and options varying by driver. Check package compatibility with your test platform before choosing an integration.
Visit CoverletThe facts
| Coverage.py | Coverlet | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Open source | Yes | Not published |
| Runs on | API, Linux, Mac, Self-hosted, Windows | Linux, Mac, Windows |
| Lowest paid plan | Free or on request | Free or on request |
| Plans published | 2 | 1 |
| Maker | Not published | Not published |
| Website | coverage.readthedocs.io | github.com |
| On test coverage tools | #3 of 27 | #7 of 27 |
Coverage.py: what it does well
- Free plan and Apache 2.0 license
- Measures statement and branch coverage
- Produces five report formats
- Dynamic contexts link lines to test functions
- Plugins can extend measurement beyond Python
What to know first
- sysmon does not support dynamic contexts
- sysmon does not support plugins
Coverlet: what it does well
- Measures line, branch, and method coverage
- Integrates with MTP, .NET global tool, VSTest, and MSBuild
- MTP driver supports four report formats
- Offers coverage threshold validation, depending on driver
- Free under the MIT License
What to know first
- Collector and MSBuild packages are incompatible with MTP projects
- MTP package requires .NET 8.0 SDK or newer
Alternatives to Coverage.py Alternatives to Coverlet The whole list