We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional 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 main thing we find valuable about Checkmarx is the ease of use. It's easy to initiate scans and triage defects."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."
"The solution is always updating to continuously add items that create a level of safety from vulnerabilities. It's one of the key features they provide that's an excellent selling point. They're always ahead of the game when it comes to finding any vulnerabilities within the database."
"The most valuable feature for me is the Jenkins Plugin."
"The most valuable feature is the simple user interface."
"Checkmarx pinpoints the vulnerability in the code and also presents the flow of malicious input across the application."
"It allows for SAST scanning of uncompiled code. Further, it natively integrates with all key repos formats (Git, TFS, SVN, Perforce, etc)."
"It is a time-saver application."
"It helps in API testing, where manual intervention was previously necessary for each payload."
"I have found the best features to be the performance and there are a lot of additional plugins available."
"We use the solution for vulnerability assessment in respect of the application and the sites."
"The feature that we have found most valuable is that it comes with pre-set configurations. They have a set of predefined options where you can pick one and start scanning. We also have the option of creating our own configurations, like how often do the applications need to be scanned."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite does not hamper the node of the server, and it does not shut down the server if it is running."
"The extension that it provides with the community version for the skills mapping is excellent."
"In my area of expertise, I feel like it has almost everything I could possibly require at this moment."
"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."
"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."
"The lack of ability to review compiled source code. It would then be able to compete with other scanning tools, such as Veracode."
"The plugins for the development environment have room for improvements such as for Android Studio and X code."
"With Checkmarx, normally you need to use one tool for quality and you need to use another tool for security. I understand that Checkmarx is not in the parity space because it's totally different, but they could include some free features or recommendations too."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it seems outdated."
"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."
"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."
"The reporting needs to be improved; it is very bad."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"The biggest drawback is reporting. It's not so good. I can download them, but they're not so informative."
"The use of system memory is an area that can be improved because it uses a lot."
"The solution lacks sufficient stability."
"Sometimes the solution can run a little slow."
"There could be an improvement in the API security testing. There is another tool called Postman and if we had a built-in portal similar to Postman which captures the API, we would be able to generate the API traffic. Right now we need a Postman tool and the Burp Suite for performing API tests. It would be a huge benefit to be able to do it in a single UI."
"As with most automated security tools, too many false positives."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 9th in Application Security Tools with 55 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6. 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 PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional writes "The solution is versatile and easy to deploy, but it needs to give more detailed security reports". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, HCL AppScan and Rapid7 InsightAppSec. See our Checkmarx One vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional 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.
