We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Qualys Web Application Scanning 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."Apart from software scanning, software composition scanning is valuable."
"The setup is very easy. There is a lot of information in the documents which makes the install not difficult at all."
"It is very useful because it fits our requirements. It is also easy to use. It is not complex, and we are satisfied with the results."
"It shows in-depth code of where actual vulnerabilities are."
"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."
"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."
"Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%."
"Scan reviews can occur during the development lifecycle."
"The most valuable feature is that we are able to scan the services and put credentials like a user ID password. We can verify the vulnerability level."
"The interface is user-friendly and easy to understand."
"You can integrate your Burp Suite results and create an integrated report. Also, the way it shows the results - threats and exploit details - makes remediation very easy."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is the progressive scan. It is good. It's done in 24 hours."
"It is a good product for website penetration testing to detect vulnerabilities."
"QualysGuard web-based scanner is very useful for performing external penetration and PCI scans from remote locations."
"Key features include: Cloud-based, so the installation is not so tedious. Easily deployed. Highly scalable. Comprehensive reporting."
"We can do scanning and submit reports straight to the customers when there are new vulnerabilities, then tell them whether they are affected or not."
"Checkmarx reports many false positives that we need to manually segregate and mark “Not exploitable”."
"The cost per user is high and should be reduced."
"The validation process needs to be sped up."
"In terms of dashboarding, the solution could provide a little more flexibility in terms of creating more dashboards. It has some of its own dashboards that come out of the box. However, if I have to implement my own dashboards that are aligned to my organization's requirements, that dashboarding feature has limited capability right now."
"I would like to see the DAST solution in the future."
"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"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."
"I really would like to integrate it as a service along with the SAP HANA Cloud Platform. It will then be easy to use it directly as a service."
"There's a distinction between internal and external scanning processes that could be streamlined. Currently, for internal scanning, specific configurations and scanner appliances need to be deployed within the network, which differs from the simpler setup for external scans. This dual process complicates the setup for comprehensive scanning coverage."
"They should try to include business logic vulnerabilities in the scanner testing."
"When comparing this solution to Veracode, Veracode has good interactive features and gives a clear understanding of what the vulnerabilities are, which error line of the vulnerability is on and what can be done. It gives interactive features, whereas this solution does not give a clear understanding of where or how to fix the problem."
"In certain cases, this product does have false positives, which the company should work on."
"The scanner reports a lot of false positives, which is something that needs to be improved."
"The solution needs to adjust its pricing. They should make it more affordable."
"In terms of the Policy Compliance model which they currently have, not all the platforms are being covered. If they could improve on the Policy Compliance model, since there are policies which are benchmarked against it, this will be helpful for us."
"The product should allow users to upload their payloads."
More Qualys Web Application Scanning Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while Qualys Web Application Scanning is ranked 19th in Application Security Tools with 31 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Qualys Web Application Scanning 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 Qualys Web Application Scanning writes "A stable solution that can be used for infrastructure vulnerability scanning and web application scanning". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Qualys Web Application Scanning is most compared with OWASP Zap, Veracode, SonarQube, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and Snyk. See our Checkmarx One vs. Qualys Web Application Scanning 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.