We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and SonarCloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Testing (AST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The main thing we find valuable about Checkmarx is the ease of use. It's easy to initiate scans and triage defects."
"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."
"It allows for SAST scanning of uncompiled code. Further, it natively integrates with all key repos formats (Git, TFS, SVN, Perforce, etc)."
"The SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."
"Checkmarx pinpoints the vulnerability in the code and also presents the flow of malicious input across the application."
"It can integrate very well with DAST solutions. So both of them are combined into an integrated solution for customers running application security."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"The main advantage of this solution is its centralized reporting functionality, which lets us track issues, then see and report on the priorities via a web portal."
"The most valuable feature of SonarCloud is its overall performance."
"The solution can be installed locally."
"The most valuable features of SonarCloud are the ability to discover vulnerabilities, security weak points, security hotspots, and all the feedback that comes into the feature branch. You can deploy the code with the security, you can eliminate the problem at the developer level rather than identifying the problem in the productions."
"I'm not implementing the solutions. However, I've talked to the people who deploy the tools, and they are happy with how easy setting up SonarCloud is."
"SonarCloud is overall a good tool for identifying code smells, bugs, and code duplication, but we've found that using Android Lint is more effective for our needs."
"Its dashboard provides a unified view of various code quality metrics, including code duplication, unit test coverage, and security hotspots."
"Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service."
"The solution provides continuous code analysis which has improved the quality of our code. It can raise alarms on vulnerabilities with immediate reports on the dashboard. Few things are false positives and we can customize the rules."
"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."
"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 resolutions should also be provided. For example, if the user faces any problem regarding an installation due to the internal security policies of their company, there should be a resolution offered."
"Checkmarx could improve the REST APIs by including automation."
"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"They can support the remaining languages that are currently not supported. They can also create a different model that can identify zero-day attacks. They can work on different patterns to identify and detect zero-day vulnerability attacks."
"The reports are good, but they still need to be improved considering what the UI offers."
"CI/CD pipeline is part of a whole chain of design, development, and production, and it's becoming increasingly crucial to optimize the various tools across different stages. However, it's still a silo approach because the full integration is missing. This isn't just an issue with SonarCloud. It's a general problem with tooling."
"I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers."
"There's room for improvement in the configuration process, particularly during the initial setup phase."
"SonarCloud's UI needs enhancement."
"The reports could improve by providing more information. We are not able to use the reports in our operation until they are improved. Additionally, if the vendor provided more customization capabilities it would be a benefit."
"The documentation needs improvement on optimizing build time for seamless CI/CD integration with our Android apps."
"We had some issues with the scanner."
"SonarCloud can improve the false positives. Sometimes the gates sometimes act a little weird. We then need to manually go and mark the false positive."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Testing (AST) with 67 reviews while SonarCloud is ranked 10th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 10 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while SonarCloud is rated 8.4. 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 SonarCloud writes "Beneficial vulnerability discovery, simple to maintain, and proactive support". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Sonatype Lifecycle, whereas SonarCloud is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, OWASP Zap, GitLab and Coverity. See our Checkmarx One vs. SonarCloud report.
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.
