We performed a comparison between SonarQube and Checkmarx based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Both solutions have intuitive interfaces and are easy to use. However, Checkmarx offers a more comprehensive feature set, including software composition scanning and a higher number of vulnerabilities detected. Checkmarx also provides better language support and more advanced reporting capabilities. SonarQube has a simpler pricing model and is generally considered more affordable. SonarQube focuses strongly on code quality and offers better integration with DevOps pipelines. The customer service and support experiences for both products vary, with some users praising the support and others reporting negative experiences.
"Checkmarx has helped us deliver more secure products. We are able to do static code analysis with the tool before shipping our code to production. When the integration is in the pipeline, this tool gives us early notifications on code fixes."
"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."
"The value you can get out of the speedy production may be worth the price tag."
"We use the solution for dynamic application testing."
"The UI is very intuitive and simple to use."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"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 setup is very easy. There is a lot of information in the documents which makes the install not difficult at all."
"The most valuable features are code scanning and Quality Gates."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, easy to access, and they provide good training files."
"SonarQube is good in terms of code review and to report on basic vulnerabilities in your applications."
"We can create a Quality Gate in order to fail Jenkins jobs where the code coverage is lower than the set percentage."
"It provides the security that is required from a solution for financial businesses."
"This solution has helped with the integration and building of our CICD pipeline."
"If code coverage is a low number then that's of great value to me."
"The solution has a wide variety of features and an open-source community that you are able to learn Java, JavaScript, or any other programing language."
"Checkmarx could improve the speed of the scans."
"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."
"I would like to see the DAST solution in the future."
"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)."
"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."
"Checkmarx being Windows only is a hindrance. Another problem is: why can't I choose PostgreSQL?"
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."
"A robust credential scanner would be a huge bonus as it would remove the need for yet another niche product."
"The learning curve can be fairly steep at first, but then, it's not an entry-level type of application. It's not like an introduction to C programming. You should know not just C programming and how to make projects but also how to apply its findings to the bigger picture. I've had users who said that they wish it was easier to understand how to configure, but I don't know if that's doable because what it's doing is a very complicated thing. I don't know if it is possible to make a complicated thing trivially simple."
"This solution finds issues that are similar to what is found by Checkmarx, and it would be nice if the overlap could be eliminated."
"The scanning part could be improved in SonarQube. We have used Coverity for scanning, and we have the critical issues reported by Coverity. When we used SonarQube for scanning and looked at the results, it seems that some of them have incorrect input. This part can be improved for C and C++ languages."
"The security in SonarQube could be better."
"The exporting capabilities could be improved. Currently, exporting is fully dependent on the SonarQube environment."
"Expression of common vulnerabilities and exposures is not always current."
"I don't believe you can have metrics of code quality based upon code analysis. I don't think it's possible for a computer to do it."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 108 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. 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 SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". Checkmarx One is most compared with Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk, Coverity and Mend.io, whereas SonarQube is most compared with SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode, Snyk and Sonatype Lifecycle. See our Checkmarx One vs. SonarQube 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.
SonarQube depends on completely what you configure the Rules. You will have the option of the Profile creation and can be assigned to the Projects. If you configure the project --> under them services configuration it is good to go. Proper configuration is important in the Sonat Qube. Yes, Sonarqube allows developers to delint their code before SAST.
Veracode recently introduced it. But this integration at developer Machine integration available for only JAVA coded Projets.
About the Vulnerability coverage, both are the same. OWASP TOP 10 is equal to Sans 25. sans25 is categorized with one category number and describes under that subsection. Refer to this. https://www.templarbit.com/blog/2018/02/08/owasp-top-10-vs-sans-cwe-25/
SonarQube can be used for SAST. However, based on our internal analysis, our team feel CheckMarx is better suited for Security compared to SonarQube. SoanrQube is used in day to day developer code scan and Checkmarx is used during code movement to staging or during release.