When comparing performance of static analysis tools such as SonarQube or SonarCloud to another tool in production, it's essential to consider multiple factors including environment, scope, languages, rules, and issues. Starting with the analysis environment is crucial, ensuring both tools are running on comparable machines with similar resources available. The analysis scope should also be consistent, taking into account operational scope and the inclusion of important files and third-party content. Since SonarQube and SonarCloud offer multi-language and multi-domain analysis by default, this broader analysis can impact speed and results. Additionally, rules have a significant impact on performance, with SonarCloud and SonarQube providing more comprehensive analysis that may take longer to complete. When evaluating the quality of performance, it's essential to consider True Positives and not just raw issue counts, as false positives or missed issues can skew the results. Ultimately, comparisons between these tools are often apples-to-oranges due to their unique features and capabilities.