We performed a comparison between Black Duck and Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It highlights what the developers have done, and it shows the impact from an intellectual property point of view."
"The stability is okay."
"The most valuable feature is the vulnerability scanning, and that it's easy to use."
"The knowledge base and the management system are the most valuable features of Black Duck Hub. It has a very helpful management environment. They offer an editor where we can check the discovered license, which is retrieved from their knowledge base. They have a huge knowledge base build over the years. It gives you some possibilities, such as this license with possibility A could cause a vulnerability issue or a potential breach."
"The most valuable feature for me in Black Duck is its ability to scan binary files effectively."
"The cloud option of the product is always available and a positive aspect of the solution."
"We didn't have a central inventory to quickly identify issues or determine how many products were affected. Now under Black Duck, it's all consolidated. You search for a component and immediately see which products use it."
"Policy management is a valuable feature."
"What's most valuable in Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is its ability to identify vulnerabilities in open-source components, especially if some critical issues exist."
"It is very easy and user friendly. It never requires any kind of technical support. You can do everything on your own."
"Checkmarx unifies all the features in its service."
"The integration part is easy...It's a stable solution right now."
"The most valuable feature of Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is the comprehensive security scan."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The customer service and support were good."
"The tool's visual scan analysis shows me all the libraries' vulnerabilities and license types. It helps identify the most complex issues with licenses. It provides good visibility. SCA shows me all libraries that are vulnerable and the extent of their vulnerability."
"They are giving a lot of APIs and Python scripts for certain functionalities, but instead of using APIs and Python scripts, they should provide these functionalities through the UI. Users should be able to customize and add more fields through the UI. Users should be able to add more fields and generate reports. Currently, they are not giving flexibility in the UI. They're providing a script that simply generates an Excel file or CSV file. There is no flexibility."
"It can be cumbersome to use or invalidate open source software because there is a hold time to check requirements or common regulations to ensure compliance."
"The product's pricing is higher compared to other competitor products."
"The scanner client is limited by the size of software it can handle."
"The solution's pricing model and documentation areas of concern where improvement is needed."
"The tool's documentation and support are areas of concern where improvements are required."
"The tool needs to improve its pricing. Its configuration is complex and can be improved."
"Due to the fact that, with our software developer life cycle, we don't need to scan our source code every day or every week. For that reason, we find the cost is too high. We might only actually use it five to ten times a year, which makes it expensive."
"It can have better licensing models."
"Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis should improve dynamic analysis."
"I have received complaints from my customers that the pricing could be improved."
"API security is an area with shortcomings that needs improvement."
"The quality of technical support has decreased over time, and it is not as good as it used to be."
"Parts of the implementation process could improve by making it more user-friendly."
"In terms of areas for improvement, what could be improved in Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is pricing because customers always compare the pricing among secure DevOps solutions in the market. Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis has a lot of competitors yet its features aren't much different. Pricing is the first thing customers consider, and from a partner perspective, if you can offer affordable pricing to your customers, it's more likely you'll have a winning deal. The performance of Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis also needs improvement because sometimes, it's slow, and in particular, scanning could take several hours."
"Instant updates for end users to identify vulnerabilities as soon as possible will make Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis better. The UI of the solution could also be improved."
More Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis Pricing and Cost Advice →
Black Duck is ranked 1st in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 19 reviews while Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is ranked 8th in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 12 reviews. Black Duck is rated 7.8, while Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Black Duck writes "Enables applications to be secure, but it must provide more open APIs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis writes "Comprehensive security scan, helpful support, and high availability". Black Duck is most compared with Snyk, Fortify Static Code Analyzer, JFrog Xray, Mend.io and Veracode, whereas Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is most compared with JFrog Xray, Semgrep Supply Chain, Fortify Static Code Analyzer, FOSSA and Mend.io. See our Black Duck vs. Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis report.
See our list of best Software Composition Analysis (SCA) vendors.
We monitor all Software Composition Analysis (SCA) 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.