We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Klocwork 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 benefit to using this solution is that we find vulnerabilities in our software before the development cycle is complete."
"The best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"Both automatic and manual code review (CxQL) are valuable."
"It is a stable product."
"I like that you don't have to compile the code in order to execute static code analysis. So, it's very handy."
"The most valuable feature is the simple user interface."
"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 tool helps the team to think beforehand about corner cases or potential bugs that might arise in real-time."
"We like using the static analysis and code refactoring, which are very valuable because of our requirements to meet safety critical levels and reliability."
"Klocwork's most valuable feature is the static code analysis feature. It detects the potential problem earlier to allow the developer to receive feedback quickly and then address it before it becomes a problem."
"The ability to create custom checkers is a plus."
"I like not having to dig through false positives. Chasing down a false positive can take anywhere from five minutes for a small easy one, then something that is complicated and goes through a whole bunch of different class cases, and it can take up to 45 minutes to an hour to find out if it is a false positive or not."
"On-the-fly analysis and incremental analysis are the best parts of Klocwork. Currently, we are using both of these features very effectively."
"It's integrated into our CI, continuous integration."
"Technical support is quite good."
"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
"Checkmarx being Windows only is a hindrance. Another problem is: why can't I choose PostgreSQL?"
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"I would like the product to include more debugging and developed tools. It needs to also add enhancements on the coding side."
"Some of the descriptions were found to be missing or were not as elaborate as compared to other descriptions. Although, they could be found across various standard sources but it would save a lot of time for developers, if this was fixed."
"Checkmarx reports many false positives that we need to manually segregate and mark “Not exploitable”."
"Checkmarx could improve the speed of the scans."
"It provides us with quite a handful of false positive issues. If Checkmarx could reduce this number, it would be a great tool to use."
"We'd like to see integration with Agile DevOps and Agile methodologies."
"Under NIST cybersecurity standards, we must address vulnerabilities within a specified time after discovering them. When we try to propagate those updates and fixes through the system, it would be nice if the clients could reconnect to the existing server or have the server dynamically updated in some way. I know that isn't easy, but maybe processes could be enhanced to make that more streamlined from a DevOps perspective."
"What needs improvement in Klocwork, compared to other products in the market, is the dashboard or reporting mechanisms that need to be a bit more flexible. The Klocwork dashboard could be improved. Though it's good, it's not as good as some of the other products in the market, which is a problem. The reporting could be more detailed and easier to sort out because sorting in Klocwork could be a bit more time-consuming, mainly when sorting defects based on filters, compared to how it's done on other tools such as Coverity."
"Klocwork has to improve its features to stay ahead of other free solutions."
"We bought Klocwork, but it was limited to one little program, but the program is now sort of failing. So, we have a license for usage on a program that is sort of failing, and we really can't use the license on anything else."
"I would like to see better codes between projects and a more user-friendly desktop in the next release."
"I believe it should support more languages, such as Python and JavaScript."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while Klocwork is ranked 16th in Application Security Tools with 20 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Klocwork is rated 8.2. 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 Klocwork writes "Their technical team helps us get the most out of the solution, but we've faced some stability problems in our environment". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover, CodeSonar and Veracode. See our Checkmarx One vs. Klocwork report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors, best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors, and best Static Code Analysis 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.
