We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Fortify WebInspect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two DevSecOps solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product's most valuable feature is static code and supply chain effect analysis. It provides a lot of visibility."
"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."
"The administration in Checkmarx is very good."
"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 features are the easy to understand interface, and it 's very user-friendly."
"The value you can get out of the speedy production may be worth the price tag."
"It gives the proper code flow of vulnerabilities and the number of occurrences."
"There are lots of small settings and tools, like an HTTP editor, that are very useful."
"It is scalable and very easy to use."
"When we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities. Comparison is easy in SSC."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The user interface is ok and it is very simple to use."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"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."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"Meta data is always needed."
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"We are trying to find out if there is a way to identify the run-time null values. I am analyzing different tools to check if there is any tool that supports run-time null value identification, but I don't think any of the tools in the market currently supports this feature. It would be helpful if Checkmarx can identify and throw an exception for a null value at the run time. It would make things a lot easier if there is a way for Checkmarx to identify nullable fields or hard-coded values in the code. The accessibility for customized Checkmarx rules is currently limited and should be improved. In addition, it would be great if Checkmarx can do static code and dynamic code validation. It does a lot of security-related scanning, and it should also do static code and dynamic code validation. Currently, for security-related validation, we are using Checkmarx, and for static code and dynamic code validation, we are using some other tools. We are spending money on different tools. We can pay a little extra money and use Checkmarx for everything."
"It provides us with quite a handful of false positive issues. If Checkmarx could reduce this number, it would be a great tool to use."
"Its pricing model can be improved. Sometimes, it is a little complex to understand its pricing model."
"As the solution becomes more complex and feature rich, it takes more time to debug and resolve problems. Feature-wise, we have no complaints, but Checkmarx becomes harder to maintain as the product becomes more complex. When I talk to support, it takes them longer to fix the problem than it used to."
"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."
"Fortify WebInspect could improve user-friendliness. Additionally, it is very bulky to use."
"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."
"The scanner could be better."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"Fortify WebInspect's shortcoming stems from the fact that it is a very expensive product in Korea, which makes it difficult for its potential customers to introduce the product in their IT environment."
"The initial setup was complex."
"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."
Checkmarx One is ranked 2nd in DevSecOps with 67 reviews while Fortify WebInspect is ranked 8th in DevSecOps with 17 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Fortify WebInspect is rated 7.0. 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 Fortify WebInspect writes "A powerful tool catering to multiple use cases that provides reasonably good technical support". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand and Snyk, whereas Fortify WebInspect is most compared with PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Fortify on Demand, Acunetix, OWASP Zap and Rapid7 InsightAppSec. See our Checkmarx One vs. Fortify WebInspect report.
See our list of best DevSecOps vendors.
We monitor all DevSecOps 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.