We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Fortify Application Defender 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 reports are very good because they include details on the code level, and make suggestions about how to fix the problems."
"Checkmarx has helped us deliver more secure products. We are able to do static code analysis with the tool before shipping our code to production. When the integration is in the pipeline, this tool gives us early notifications on code fixes."
"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 main thing we find valuable about Checkmarx is the ease of use. It's easy to initiate scans and triage defects."
"The features and technologies are very good. The flexibility and the roadmap have also been very good. They're at the forefront of delivering the additional capabilities that are required with cloud delivery, etc. Their ability to deliver what customers require and when they require is very important."
"Both automatic and manual code review (CxQL) are valuable."
"The solution has good performance, it is able to compute in 10 to 15 minutes."
"It shows in-depth code of where actual vulnerabilities are."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"The product saves us cost and time."
"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"The tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."
"The information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."
"The cost per user is high and should be reduced."
"I expect application security vendors to cover all aspects of application security, including SAST, DAST, and even mobile application security testing. And it would be much better if they provided an on-premises and cloud option for all these main application security features."
"Its pricing model can be improved. Sometimes, it is a little complex to understand its pricing model."
"If it is a very large code base then we have a problem where we cannot scan it."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"The validation process needs to be sped up."
"I would like to see the DAST solution in the future."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."
"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."
"The solution is quite expensive."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while Fortify Application Defender is ranked 30th in Application Security Tools with 11 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Fortify Application Defender is rated 7.8. 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 Fortify Application Defender writes "Useful for fast code review in devOps pipelines ". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and SonarCloud, whereas Fortify Application Defender is most compared with Coverity, CAST Application Intelligence Platform, SonarQube, Qualys Web Application Scanning and Fortify on Demand. See our Checkmarx One vs. Fortify Application Defender 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.
Fewer false positives with CX than Fortify. More integrated.
Looking at the Gartner report I would say that Checkmarx is way easier to set up (initial setup) compared to Micro Focus Fortify.
Also, the financial strength of the Micro Focus Fortify spin/merger is a concern so investments could be at risk.
The major difference is that Checkmarx scans the code without compiling the code. This has a great advantage as code building issues are eliminated,
scan time is very less and false positive is less to some extent. One more major this is Checkmarx learns as you eliminate false positives and does not show the same issue again. We can perform incremental scans on the codebase where the old issue is nicely marked as "Recurring" and new ones in Red as NEW. Checkmarx has a highly customizable filter creation where you can create a filter that can eliminate the common recurring issues in
scans. This feature is very flexible and you can write your own filters and also, write specific patterns that are found in manual review which is a
great help as coding styles differ form teams to teams.
Thanks a lot. Thank you for the information.