Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Akamai API Security vs Checkmarx One comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 4, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Akamai API Security
Ranking in API Security
1st
Average Rating
6.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Checkmarx One
Ranking in API Security
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (24th), Static Code Analysis (3rd), DevSecOps (4th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the API Security category, the mindshare of Akamai API Security is 20.0%, down from 26.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Checkmarx One is 6.4%, up from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Security
 

Featured Reviews

Deepesh  Singh - PeerSpot reviewer
Excellent API authentication support but needs better analytics and reporting
I conducted a proof of concept for four months to identify PII and financial information exposed through APIs. Primarily, the API part is effective. I have been using Akamai AppMyWAF. The tool's API authentication, tokenization, and enhanced scalability and performance are valuable features. Akamai's support is impeccable, and its plug-and-play features are helpful.
Syed Hasan - PeerSpot reviewer
Partner experiences excellent technical support and seamless initial setup
In my opinion, if we are able to extract or show the report, and because everything is going towards agent tech and GenAI, it would be beneficial if it could get integrated with our code base and do the fix automatically. It could suggest how the code base is written and automatically populate the source code with three different solution options to choose from. This would be really helpful.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"API throttling is the most valuable feature of Akamai API Security."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its integration with API gateways, WAP and with part of their SDLC."
"The API part is effective."
"It gives the proper code flow of vulnerabilities and the number of occurrences."
"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."
"I like that you don't have to compile the code in order to execute static code analysis. So, it's very handy."
"Scan reviews can occur during the development lifecycle."
"The identification of verification-related security vulnerabilities is really important and one of the key things. It also identifies vulnerabilities for any kind of third-party tool coming into the system or any third-party tools that you are using, which is very useful for avoiding random hacking."
"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."
"Checkmarx pinpoints the vulnerability in the code and also presents the flow of malicious input across the application."
"The user interface is modern and nice to use."
 

Cons

"It would be beneficial to use machine learning and API throttling together to identify how the APIs are called and whether it's coming from the right person or the wrong person."
"The challenge I found was with contextualization and how analytics are generated."
"I think it would be good if they can integrate more with API gateways as this is currently limited."
"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 could improve the REST APIs by including automation."
"There is nothing particular that I don't like in this solution. It can have more integrations, but the integrations that we would like are in the roadmap anyway, and they just need to deliver the roadmap. What I like about the roadmap is that it is going where it needs to go. If I were to look at the roadmap, there is nothing that is jumping out there that says to me, "Yeah. I'd like something else on the roadmap." What they're looking to deliver is what I would expect and forecast them to deliver."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"C, C++, VB and T-SQL are not supported by this product. Although, C and C++ were advertised as being supported."
"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
"Micro-services need to be included in the next release."
"You can't use it in the continuous delivery pipeline because the scanning takes too much time."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a limit to the number of APIs we can use inside a bundle, and we have to pay extra if we exceed that limit."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"The tool's pricing is fine."
"It is not expensive, but sometimes, their pricing model or licensing model is not very clear. There are similar variables, such as projects or developers, and sometimes, it is a little bit confusing."
"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."
"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."
"We're using a commercial version of Checkmarx, and we paid for the solution for one year. The price is high and could be reduced."
"I would rate the solution’s pricing an eight out of ten. The tool’s pricing is higher than others and it is for the license alone."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Security solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Akamai API Security?
API throttling is the most valuable feature of Akamai API Security.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Akamai API Security?
I mentioned that support from Akamai is expensive yet it is worth it.
What needs improvement with Akamai API Security?
The challenge I found was with contextualization and how analytics are generated. Reports were sent in a raw format without proper analytics. There was no mechanism to identify which APIs will alwa...
What alternatives are there for Fortify WebInspect and Fortify SCA?
I would like to recommend Checkmarx. With Checkmarx, you are able to have an all in one solution for SAST and SCA as well. Veracode is only a cloud solution. Hope this helps.
What do you like most about Checkmarx?
Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Checkmarx?
The pricing is relatively expensive due to the product's quality and performance, but it is worth it.
 

Also Known As

Noname Security
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai API Security vs. Checkmarx One and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.