We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Kiuwan 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 main benefit to using this solution is that we find vulnerabilities in our software before the development cycle is complete."
"Our static operation security has been able to identify more security issues since implementing this solution."
"It's not an obstacle for developers. They can easily write their code and make it more secure with Checkmarx."
"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."
"It is very useful because it fits our requirements. It is also easy to use. It is not complex, and we are satisfied with the results."
"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 user interface is modern and nice to use."
"It is a stable product."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report."
"Lifecycle features, because they permit us to show non-technical people the risk and costs hidden into the code due to bad programming practices."
"I've found the reporting features the most helpful."
"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable in Kiuwan is the speed of scanning. Compared to other SaaS tools I have used, Kiuwan is much quicker in performing scans. I have not yet used it on a large code base, but from what I have experienced, it is efficient and accurate. Additionally, I have used it both manually and in an automated pipeline, and both methods have been effective. The speed of scanning is what makes it valuable to me."
"I find it immensely helpful because it's not just about generating code; it's about ensuring efficiency in the execution."
"We are using this solution to increase the quality of our software and to test the vulnerabilities in our tools before the customers find them."
"The most valuable feature is the time to resolution, where it tells you how long it is going to take to get to a zero-base or a five-star security rating."
"Checkmarx could be improved with more integration with third-party software."
"Creating and editing custom rules in Checkmarx is difficult because the license for the editor comes at an additional cost, and there is a steep learning curve."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it seems outdated."
"In terms of dashboarding, the solution could provide a little more flexibility in terms of creating more dashboards. It has some of its own dashboards that come out of the box. However, if I have to implement my own dashboards that are aligned to my organization's requirements, that dashboarding feature has limited capability right now."
"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."
"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."
"The statistics module has a function that allows you to show some statistics, but I think it's limited. Maybe it needs more information."
"The integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"It would be beneficial to streamline calls and transitions seamlessly for improved functionality."
"Integration of the programming tools could be improved."
"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."
"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."
"Perhaps more languages supported."
"The configuration hasn't been that good."
"I would like to see better integration with the Visual Studio and Eclipse IDEs."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while Kiuwan is ranked 22nd in Application Security Tools with 23 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Kiuwan 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 Kiuwan writes "Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Kiuwan is most compared with SonarQube, Snyk, Veracode, Fortify on Demand and SonarCloud. See our Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) 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.
