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 best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."
"The solution is scalable, but other solutions are better."
"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 of Checkmarx are the Best Fix Location and the Payments option because you can save a lot of time trying to mitigate the configuration. Using these tools can save you a lot of time."
"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 most valuable features of Checkmarx are difficult to pinpoint because of the way the functionalities and the features are intertwined, it's difficult to say which part of them I prefer most. You initiate the scan, you have a scan, you have the review set, and reporting, they all work together as one whole process. It's not like accounting software, where you have the different features, et cetera."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"I like that you don't have to compile the code in order to execute static code analysis. So, it's very handy."
"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."
"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."
"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."
"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."
"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 have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."
"I've tried many open source applications and the remediation or correction actions that were provided by Kiuwan were very good in comparison."
"The solution offers very good technical support."
"I think the CxAudit tool has room for improvement. At the beginning you can choose a scan of a project, but in any event the project must be scanned again (wasting time)."
"Checkmarx being Windows only is a hindrance. Another problem is: why can't I choose PostgreSQL?"
"Checkmarx is not good because it has too many false positive issues."
"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 can run only one project at a time."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"The integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."
"The statistics module has a function that allows you to show some statistics, but I think it's limited. Maybe it needs more information."
"Perhaps more languages supported."
"It would be beneficial to streamline calls and transitions seamlessly for improved functionality."
"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"I would like to see better integration with the Visual Studio and Eclipse IDEs."
"I would like to see additional languages supported."
"The configuration hasn't been that good."
"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."
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 Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.
