Paras:
even if we had these two profilers concurrently available, I don't think it would be a desirable combination. Any profiling adds *some* overhead to the execution - in case of coverage and performance, much smaller than for memory, for example. So, when you profile for performance, you don't want any additional overhead - and in fact, you probably want to specify profiling areas to have code that does not need profiling running without overhead. So, adding coverage to the mix would actually be counter productive, in my view.
A combination of coverage and memory profiling would actually make a lost more sense. Unfortunately, we currently do not support combining these two, but it is possible we will be looking at it in the near future.
Best regards,
Sergei