We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Polyspace Code Prover based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."
"It is a stable product."
"The main thing we find valuable about Checkmarx is the ease of use. It's easy to initiate scans and triage defects."
"The solution improved the efficiency of our code security reviews. It helps tremendously because it finds hundreds of potential problems sometimes."
"Overall, the ability to find vulnerabilities in the code is better than the tool that we were using before."
"The reports are very good because they include details on the code level, and make suggestions about how to fix the problems."
"Vulnerability details is valuable."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is that its number of false positives is less than the other security application platforms. Its ease of use is another good feature. It also supports most of the languages."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"The outputs are very reliable."
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."
"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."
"Checkmarx needs to be more scalable for large enterprise companies."
"If it is a very large code base then we have a problem where we cannot scan it."
"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."
"The resolutions should also be provided. For example, if the user faces any problem regarding an installation due to the internal security policies of their company, there should be a resolution offered."
"I would like to see the rate of false positives reduced."
"They can support the remaining languages that are currently not supported. They can also create a different model that can identify zero-day attacks. They can work on different patterns to identify and detect zero-day vulnerability attacks."
"I really would like to integrate it as a service along with the SAP HANA Cloud Platform. It will then be easy to use it directly as a service."
"The cost per user is high and should be reduced."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"The tool has some stability issues."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"Automation could be a challenge."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while Polyspace Code Prover is ranked 23rd in Application Security Tools with 5 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Polyspace Code Prover is rated 7.6. 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 Polyspace Code Prover writes "A stable solution for developing software components". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Polyspace Code Prover is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Klocwork, CodeSonar and Parasoft SOAtest. See our Checkmarx One vs. Polyspace Code Prover report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.