We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Checkmarx One 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 automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment."
"The tool's most valuable feature is performance."
"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."
"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."
"One of the features that I feel is groundbreaking, that I would like to see expanded on, is the IAS feature: The Interactive Application Security Testing module that gets loaded onto an application on a server, for more in-depth, granular findings. I think that is really neat. I haven't seen a lot of competitors doing that."
"Picks up weaknesses in our app setups."
"We are able to create a report which shows the PCI DSS scoring and share it with the application teams. Then, they can correlate and see exactly what they need to fix, and why."
"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"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 report function is the solution's greatest asset."
"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."
"One of the most valuable features is it is flexible."
"Both automatic and manual code review (CxQL) are valuable."
"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"The solution communicates where to fix the issue for the purpose of less iterations."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the SCA module and the code-checking module. Additionally, the solutions are explanatory and helpful."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."
"You can't actually change your password after you've set it unless you go back into the administration account and you change it there. Thus, if you're locked out and don't remember your password, that's a thing."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"It should be easier to recreate something manually, with the manual tool, because Acunetix is an automatic tool. If it finds something, it should be easier to manually replicate it. Sometimes you don't get the raw data from the input and output, so that could be improved."
"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."
"The solution can be improved by adding the ability to scan subdomains automatically, and by providing reports that can be exported to external databases to share with other solutions."
"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."
"Its user interface could be improved and made more friendly."
"The plugins for the development environment have room for improvements such as for Android Studio and X code."
"Checkmarx reports many false positives that we need to manually segregate and mark “Not exploitable”."
"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."
"The interactive application security testing, or IAST, the interactive part where you're looking at an application that lives in a runtime environment on a server or virtual machine, needs improvement."
"Meta data is always needed."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"Checkmarx could be improved with more integration with third-party software."
Acunetix is ranked 17th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Checkmarx One is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Rapid7 Metasploit, whereas Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and GitHub. See our Acunetix vs. Checkmarx One report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors, best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors, and best Vulnerability Management 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.
