We performed a comparison between SonarQube and Checkmarx based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Both solutions have intuitive interfaces and are easy to use. However, Checkmarx offers a more comprehensive feature set, including software composition scanning and a higher number of vulnerabilities detected. Checkmarx also provides better language support and more advanced reporting capabilities. SonarQube has a simpler pricing model and is generally considered more affordable. SonarQube focuses strongly on code quality and offers better integration with DevOps pipelines. The customer service and support experiences for both products vary, with some users praising the support and others reporting negative experiences.
"The main benefit to using this solution is that we find vulnerabilities in our software before the development cycle is complete."
"The solution communicates where to fix the issue for the purpose of less iterations."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are difficult to pinpoint because of the way the functionalities and the features are intertwined, it's difficult to say which part of them I prefer most. You initiate the scan, you have a scan, you have the review set, and reporting, they all work together as one whole process. It's not like accounting software, where you have the different features, et cetera."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the SCA module and the code-checking module. Additionally, the solutions are explanatory and helpful."
"Overall, the ability to find vulnerabilities in the code is better than the tool that we were using before."
"The administration in Checkmarx is very good."
"It is very useful because it fits our requirements. It is also easy to use. It is not complex, and we are satisfied with the results."
"Vulnerability details is valuable."
"SonarQube is a fantastic tool which saves us precious time."
"We've configured it to run on each commit, providing feedback on our software quality. ]"
"The overall quality of the indicator is good."
"The most valuable feature is the security hotspot feature that identifies where your code is prone to have security issues."
"The good thing with SonarQube is it covers a lot of issues, it's a very robust framework."
"It provides you with many features, as it does with the premium model, but there are still extra features that can be purchased if needed."
"It provides the security that is required from a solution for financial businesses."
"The static code analysis of the solution is the most important aspect for us. When it comes to security breaches within the code, we can leverage some rules to allow us to identify the repetition in our code and the possible targets that we may have. It makes it very easy to review our code for security purposes."
"In terms of dashboarding, the solution could provide a little more flexibility in terms of creating more dashboards. It has some of its own dashboards that come out of the box. However, if I have to implement my own dashboards that are aligned to my organization's requirements, that dashboarding feature has limited capability right now."
"I would like to see the DAST solution in the future."
"I would like the product to include more debugging and developed tools. It needs to also add enhancements on the coding side."
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"The validation process needs to be sped up."
"One area for improvement in Checkmarx is pricing, as it's more expensive than other products."
"I would like to see the rate of false positives reduced."
"Ease of use/interface."
"During the setup process, we only had one issue related to the number of available files. To perform the analysis, you have quite a lot of available file handles, so we had to increase that limit."
"SonarQube's detail in the security could be improved. It may be helpful to have additional details, with regards to Oracle PL/SQL. For example, it's neither as built nor as thorough as Java. For now, this is the only additional feature I would like to see."
"For improvement, this solution could be offered on Docker and the cloud and the support for this solution could be improved. Customizing rules could also be made simpler."
"Their dashboarding is very limited. They can improve their dashboards for multiple areas, such as security review, maintainability, etc. They have all this information, so they should publish all this information on the dashboard so that the users can view the summary and then analyze it further. This is something that I would like to see in the next version."
"Code security scanning could be improved."
"Code security could be better. They are already focusing on it, but I see a lot of improvement opportunities over there. I can see a lot of false positives in terms of security. They need to make the tests more accurate so that the false positives are not detected so frequently. It would also help if they provided us with an installer."
"After scanning our code and generating a report, it would be helpful if SonarQube could also generate a solution to fix vulnerabilities in the report."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 110 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". Checkmarx One is most compared with Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk, Coverity and Mend.io, whereas SonarQube is most compared with SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode, Snyk and GitHub Advanced Security. See our Checkmarx One vs. SonarQube report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
SonarQube depends on completely what you configure the Rules. You will have the option of the Profile creation and can be assigned to the Projects. If you configure the project --> under them services configuration it is good to go. Proper configuration is important in the Sonat Qube. Yes, Sonarqube allows developers to delint their code before SAST.
Veracode recently introduced it. But this integration at developer Machine integration available for only JAVA coded Projets.
About the Vulnerability coverage, both are the same. OWASP TOP 10 is equal to Sans 25. sans25 is categorized with one category number and describes under that subsection. Refer to this. https://www.templarbit.com/blog/2018/02/08/owasp-top-10-vs-sans-cwe-25/
SonarQube can be used for SAST. However, based on our internal analysis, our team feel CheckMarx is better suited for Security compared to SonarQube. SoanrQube is used in day to day developer code scan and Checkmarx is used during code movement to staging or during release.