We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Wallarm NG WAF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is that it actually identifies the different criteria you can set to meet whatever standards you're trying to get your system accredited for."
"We were using HPE Security Fortify to scan code for security vulnerabilities, but it can scan only after a successful compile. If the code has dependencies or build errors, the scan fails. With Checkmarx, pre-compile scanning is seamless. This allows us to scan more code."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"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."
"One of the most valuable features is it is flexible."
"The user interface is modern and nice to use."
"Overall, the ability to find vulnerabilities in the code is better than the tool that we were using before."
"The setup is very easy. There is a lot of information in the documents which makes the install not difficult at all."
"Helps us to monitor situation in regards to attacks to our sites and prevents a lot of them."
"Checkmarx could be improved with more integration with third-party software."
"Licensing models and Swift language support are the aspects in which this product needs to improve. Swift is a new language, in which major customers require support for lower prices."
"The tool is currently quite static in terms of finding security vulnerabilities. It would be great if it was more dynamic and we had even more tools at our disposal to keep us safe. It would help if there was more scanning or if the process was more automated."
"The product's reporting feature could be better. The feature works well for developers, but reports generated to be shared with external parties are poor, it lacks the details one gets when viewing the results directly from the Checkmarx One platform."
"There is nothing particular that I don't like in this solution. It can have more integrations, but the integrations that we would like are in the roadmap anyway, and they just need to deliver the roadmap. What I like about the roadmap is that it is going where it needs to go. If I were to look at the roadmap, there is nothing that is jumping out there that says to me, "Yeah. I'd like something else on the roadmap." What they're looking to deliver is what I would expect and forecast them to deliver."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"Implementing a blackout time for any user or teams: Needs improvement."
"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."
"The biggest problem for us was the stability and speed using the first version of Wallarm. Now, it is fine."
Earn 20 points
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in API Security with 67 reviews while Wallarm NG WAF is ranked 8th in API Security. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Wallarm NG WAF is rated 8.6. 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 Wallarm NG WAF writes "Active threat detection and adaptive rules are the most valuable for us". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Wallarm NG WAF is most compared with Salt Security, Noname Security, AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF and Cloudflare. See our Checkmarx One vs. Wallarm NG WAF report.
See our list of best API Security vendors.
We monitor all API Security 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.
