We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Polyspace Code Prover 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 UI is very intuitive and simple to use."
"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."
"The only thing I like is that Checkmarx does not need to compile."
"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."
"The user interface is modern and nice to use."
"It shows in-depth code of where actual vulnerabilities are."
"One of the most valuable features is it is flexible."
"Most valuable features include: ease of use, dashboard. interface and the ability to report."
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."
"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"The outputs are very reliable."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"If it is a very large code base then we have a problem where we cannot scan it."
"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."
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"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."
"Checkmarx could improve the solution reports and false positives. The false positives could be reduced. For example, we have alerts that are tagged as vulnerabilities but when you drill down they are not."
"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."
"One area for improvement in Checkmarx is pricing, as it's more expensive than other products."
"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"The tool has some stability issues."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while Polyspace Code Prover is ranked 23rd in Application Security Tools with 5 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Polyspace Code Prover is rated 7.6. 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 Polyspace Code Prover writes "A stable solution for developing software components". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Polyspace Code Prover is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Klocwork, CodeSonar and Parasoft SOAtest. See our Checkmarx One vs. Polyspace Code Prover 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.
