We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Checkmarx One 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 most important feature is that it's a web-based graphical user interface. That is a great addition. Also, the ability to schedule scans is great."
"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."
"Overall, it's a very good tool and a very good engine."
"We are able to create a report which shows the PCI DSS scoring and share it with the application teams. Then, they can correlate and see exactly what they need to fix, and why."
"Acunetix has an awesome crawler. It gives a referral site map of near targets and also goes really deep to find all the inputs without issues. This was valuable because it helped me find some files or directories, like web admin panels without authentication, which were hidden."
"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."
"The solution is highly stable."
"The automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment."
"It is a stable product."
"Vulnerability details is valuable."
"Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%."
"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."
"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."
"The report function is the solution's greatest asset."
"It has all the features we need."
"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."
"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."
"There's a clear need for a reduction in pricing to make the service more accessible."
"We want to see how much bandwidth usage it consumes. When we monitor traffic we have issues with the consumption and throttling of the traffic."
"Acunetix needs to improve its cost."
"I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection."
"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us."
"Licensing models and Swift language support are the aspects in which this product needs to improve. Swift is a new language, in which major customers require support for lower prices."
"Implementing a blackout time for any user or teams: Needs improvement."
"There is nothing particular that I don't like in this solution. It can have more integrations, but the integrations that we would like are in the roadmap anyway, and they just need to deliver the roadmap. What I like about the roadmap is that it is going where it needs to go. If I were to look at the roadmap, there is nothing that is jumping out there that says to me, "Yeah. I'd like something else on the roadmap." What they're looking to deliver is what I would expect and forecast them to deliver."
"I think the CxAudit tool has room for improvement. At the beginning you can choose a scan of a project, but in any event the project must be scanned again (wasting time)."
"The cost per user is high and should be reduced."
"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."
"Checkmarx is not good because it has too many false positive issues."
"The tool is currently quite static in terms of finding security vulnerabilities. It would be great if it was more dynamic and we had even more tools at our disposal to keep us safe. It would help if there was more scanning or if the process was more automated."
Acunetix is ranked 17th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Checkmarx One is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Qualys Web Application Scanning, whereas Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and GitHub. See our Acunetix vs. Checkmarx One report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors, best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors, and best Vulnerability Management 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.