Hi Veeraiah, AQM (by Mendix and the Software Improvement Group) and ACR (by Clevr) seems to be performing the same thing because they are performing the same thing. Checking code quality on a number of criteria that are pretty similar. So similar that the difference between them is hardly worth discussing. And, there are others. One more that I know of is OmNext by the Dutch company OmNext.

So instead of starting a dog-fight about these tools, let me just get down to the essence: mindset.

Over the last four years, I have used each of these. The result is exactly the same each time: attention for all kinds of small and big pitfalls and loads of improvements to the code that would otherwise only have popped up in bugs, in performance loss and in high maintenance costs. And what I love most about it: you get tought lots of tricks that improve your programming skills.

Any of these that I advice? No. Just make sure that you use one of them, at the least.

Hi Veeraiah

Not sure i agree with they are performing the same thing; -) 

They do have the same goal and I agree with Tim that using a tool to keep your code quality mindset up is indeed a great idea anyway.

But from my perspective you can best compare ACR with a language specific ‘linter’ and AQM with a quality assurance platfrom that reports on risk and refactoring candidates on system level.

AQM looks at development-team level, it does not validate the syntax of one 1 line of code.  It provides the link between technical and business ppl by making the code and architecture more transparent, it looks at risks in maintainability , choice of technology, third party vulnerabilities , Mendix misconfigurations and security flaws in your embedded (Java, JS) high code. Linters use specific and ‘hard’ rules for things that are not allowed in a certain technologies. Which is also important to get warnings about. 

Using both tools gets you covered om multiple layers.  hope this helps

Michiel Cuijpers, Software Improvement Group Mendix partner for AQM – QSM