We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Fortify WebInspect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two DevSecOps solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Apart from software scanning, software composition scanning is valuable."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the Best Fix Location and the Payments option because you can save a lot of time trying to mitigate the configuration. Using these tools can save you a lot of time."
"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 the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"It's not an obstacle for developers. They can easily write their code and make it more secure with Checkmarx."
"The most valuable feature of Checkmarx is the user interface, it is very easy to use. We do not need to configure anything, we only have to scan to see the results."
"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 static analysis."
"Reporting, centralized dashboard, and bird's eye view of all vulnerabilities are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."
"It is scalable and very easy to use."
"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities. It's better at it than other products."
"The user interface is ok and it is very simple to use."
"We are trying to find out if there is a way to identify the run-time null values. I am analyzing different tools to check if there is any tool that supports run-time null value identification, but I don't think any of the tools in the market currently supports this feature. It would be helpful if Checkmarx can identify and throw an exception for a null value at the run time. It would make things a lot easier if there is a way for Checkmarx to identify nullable fields or hard-coded values in the code. The accessibility for customized Checkmarx rules is currently limited and should be improved. In addition, it would be great if Checkmarx can do static code and dynamic code validation. It does a lot of security-related scanning, and it should also do static code and dynamic code validation. Currently, for security-related validation, we are using Checkmarx, and for static code and dynamic code validation, we are using some other tools. We are spending money on different tools. We can pay a little extra money and use Checkmarx for everything."
"The validation process needs to be sped up."
"We can run only one project at a time."
"The plugins for the development environment have room for improvements such as for Android Studio and X code."
"The product can be improved by continuing to expand the application languages and frameworks that can be scanned for vulnerabilities. This includes expanded coverage for mobile applications as well as open-source development tools."
"Checkmarx could improve the REST APIs by including automation."
"Meta data is always needed."
"The statistics module has a function that allows you to show some statistics, but I think it's limited. Maybe it needs more information."
"One thing I would like to see them introduce is a cloud-based platform."
"The solution needs better integration with Microsoft's Azure Cloud or an extension of Azure DevOps. In fact, it should better integrate with any cloud provider. Right now, it's quite difficult to integrate with that solution, from the cloud perspective."
"Fortify WebInspect's shortcoming stems from the fact that it is a very expensive product in Korea, which makes it difficult for its potential customers to introduce the product in their IT environment."
"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."
"Fortify WebInspect could improve user-friendliness. Additionally, it is very bulky to use."
"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."
"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."
"The initial setup was complex."
Checkmarx One is ranked 2nd in DevSecOps with 67 reviews while Fortify WebInspect is ranked 8th in DevSecOps with 17 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Fortify WebInspect is rated 7.0. 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 WebInspect writes "A powerful tool catering to multiple use cases that provides reasonably good technical support". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand and Snyk, whereas Fortify WebInspect is most compared with PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Fortify on Demand, Acunetix, OWASP Zap and Rapid7 InsightAppSec. See our Checkmarx One vs. Fortify WebInspect report.
See our list of best DevSecOps vendors.
We monitor all DevSecOps 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.