We performed a comparison between Checkmarx 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 solution allows us to create custom rules for code checks."
"Overall, the ability to find vulnerabilities in the code is better than the tool that we were using before."
"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."
"The reports are very good because they include details on the code level, and make suggestions about how to fix the problems."
"I like that you don't have to compile the code in order to execute static code analysis. So, it's very handy."
"The setup is very easy. There is a lot of information in the documents which makes the install not difficult at all."
"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 best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."
"The Spider is the most useful feature. It helps to analyze the entire web application, and it finds all the passes and offers an automated identification of security issues."
"BurpSuite helps us to identify and fix silly mistakes that are sometimes introduced by our developers in their coding."
"You can download different plugins if you don't have them in the standard edition."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is one of the best user-friendly solutions for getting the proxy set up."
"There is no other tool like it. I like the intuitiveness and the plugins that are available."
"It was easy to learn."
"The most valuable feature is Burp Collaborator."
"It's good testing software."
"The product's reporting feature could be better. The feature works well for developers, but reports generated to be shared with external parties are poor, it lacks the details one gets when viewing the results directly from the Checkmarx One platform."
"Updating and debugging of queries is not very convenient."
"The integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."
"When we first ran it on a big project, there wasn't enough memory on the computer. It originally ran with eight gigabytes, and now it runs with 32. The software stopped at some point, and while I don't think it said it ran out of memory, it just said "stopped" and something else. We had to go to the logs and send them to the integrator, and eventually, they found a memory issue in the logs and recommended increasing the memory. We doubled it once, and it didn't seem enough. We doubled it again, and it helped."
"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."
"We have received some feedback from our customers who are receiving a large number of false positives."
"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."
"We can run only one project at a time."
"The technical support team's response time is mostly delayed and should be improved."
"It should provide a better way to integrate with Jenkins so that DAST (dynamic application security testing) can be automated."
"There should be a heads up display like the one available in OWASP Zap."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional can improve by having more features in the free version for beginners to try."
"I am from Brazil. The currency exchange rate from a dollar to a Brazilian Real is quite steep. It is almost six to one. It would be good if it can be sold in the local currency, and its price is cheaper for us."
"I would like to see the return of the spider mechanism instead of the crawling feature. Burp Suite's earlier version 1.7 had an excellent spider option, and it would be beneficial if Burp incorporated those features into the current version. The crawling techniques used in the current version are not as efficient as those used in earlier versions."
"There is not much automation in the tool."
"The scanner and crawler need to be improved."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmarx is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 12th in Application Security Tools with 54 reviews. Checkmarx is rated 7.6, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Checkmarx 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 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 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.