No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

CAST Highlight vs Checkmarx One comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

CAST Highlight
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (16th)
Checkmarx One
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (17th), Container Security (16th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (8th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. CAST Highlight is designed for Software Composition Analysis (SCA) and holds a mindshare of 1.2%, up 0.9% compared to last year.
Checkmarx One, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 9.9% mindshare, down 11.0% since last year.
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
CAST Highlight1.2%
Black Duck SCA11.7%
Snyk10.5%
Other76.6%
Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One9.9%
SonarQube16.3%
Snyk5.5%
Other68.3%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Jayanti Rode - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Associate Manager at Accenture
Identifies migration blockers and boosters while facing challenges with platform-specific roadblocks
The solution provides agnostic blockers for platforms as well as for containerization. Within that containerization, it offers generic blockers. However, my project might require it to provide Windows-specific blockers or Linux-specific blockers, as I often work with only one platform at a time. If I received categorization in containerization blockers, it would save time. Understanding only the OS-specific blockers means I would avoid resolving irrelevant issues, thus saving time. Initially, I receive a response from support, however, if there is involvement from R&D or other teams, it may take longer than expected. The support team is challenging when sharing source code. As this is a static code analysis tool, it sometimes requires source code for R&D. However, CAST clients may be restricted from sharing due to business logic and nondisclosure agreements. This creates a challenge, and I may have to share pseudo code or seek client approval, risking escalation.
Shahzad Shahzad - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Solution Architect | L3+ Systems & Cloud Engineer | SRE Specialist at Canada Cloud Solution
Enable secure development workflows while identifying opportunities for faster scans and improved AI guidance
Checkmarx One is a very strong platform, but there are several areas where it can improve to support modern DevSecOps workflows even better. For example, better real-time developer guidance is needed. The IDE plugin should offer richer AI-powered auto-fixes similar to SNYK Code or GitHub Copilot Security, as current guidance is good but not deeply contextual for large-scale enterprise codebases. This matters because it reduces developer friction and accelerates shift-left adoption. More transparency control over the correlation engines is another need. The correlation engine is powerful but not fully transparent. Users want to understand why vulnerabilities were correlated or de-prioritized, which helps AppSec teams trust the prioritization logic. Faster SAST scan and more language coverage is needed since SAST scan can still be slow for very large mono-repos and there is limited deep support for new language frameworks like Rust and Go, along with advanced coverage for serverless-specific frameworks. This matters because large organizations want sub-minute scans in CI/CD as cloud-native ecosystems evolve fast. A strong API security module is another area for enhancement. API security scanning could be improved with active testing, API discovery, full Swagger, OpenAPI, drift detection, and schema-based fuzzing. This is important as API attacks are one of the biggest AppSec risks in 2025. Checkmarx One is strong, but I see a few areas for improvement including faster SAST scanning for large mono-repos, deeper language framework support, more transparent correlation logic, and stronger API security that includes discovery and runtime context. The IDE plugin could offer more AI-assisted fixes, and the SBOM lifecycle tracking can evolve further. Enhancing integration with SIEM and SOAR would also make enterprise adoption smoother, and these improvements would help developers and AppSec teams move faster with more accuracy.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features of the CAST Highlight are the interface and there are three notations that are very simple to understand and communicate with."
"CAST Highlight provides a clear overview of the role portfolio and allows users to assess the overall quality of the environment. Users can see where improvements are needed and follow up on trends of the application."
"The way it tells you which codebase is more ready for the cloud and which codebase is less ready is very valuable. It works seamlessly with most languages."
"The way it tells you which codebase is more ready for the cloud and which codebase is less ready is very valuable, and it works seamlessly with most languages."
"In cloud migration, I use CAST highlight to identify blockers, which are the negative road patterns, and also the boosters, which are positive code patterns."
"CAST Highlight is easy to use and has a good dashboard."
"We are using CAST Highlight for the location because it's an indicator for us that can differentiate us from the other health insurance company, and we are using the indicator as proof of the quality of service for our application."
"The solution provides agnostic blockers for platforms as well as for containerization."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is that its number of false positives is less than the other security application platforms, its ease of use is another good feature, and it also supports most of the languages."
"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."
"The identification of verification-related security vulnerabilities is really important and one of the key things, and 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."
"Checkmarx One has positively impacted the organization, and since replacing the previous tool, SAST and SCA scans are conducted in a couple of minutes instead of hours or days, saving time and increasing speed to market by reducing the timeline from three or four days to one day only."
"Overall, the ability to find vulnerabilities in the code is better than the tool that we were using before."
"It's been a very positive experience overall."
"Checkmarx pinpoints the vulnerability in the code and also presents the flow of malicious input across the application."
"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."
 

Cons

"The reports that describe the issues of concern are rather abstract and the issues should be more clearly described to the user."
"There could be potential improvements or additional features added to CAST Highlight to make it better."
"It is a pretty costly tool. A lot of customers are resistant to using it."
"Its price should be better. It is a pretty costly tool. They have two products: CAST Highlight and CAST AIP. I would expect CAST Highlight to have the Help dashboard and the Engineering dashboard. These dashboards are currently a part of CAST AIP, and if these are made available in CAST Highlight, customers won't have to use two different products all the time."
"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution. However, CAST Highlight is less expensive than the CAST AIP, but it remains too expensive and the professional services from CAST are also too expensive."
"The ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight."
"Technical support could be better."
"If I received categorization in containerization blockers, it would save time."
"The resolutions should also be provided. For example, if the user faces any problem regarding an installation due to the internal security policies of their company, there should be a resolution offered."
"Checkmarx One is often down when the cloud provider experiences issues. A more fail-tolerant solution needs to be created."
"The product can be improved by continuing to expand the application languages and frameworks that can be scanned for vulnerabilities."
"Checkmarx is not good because it has too many false positive issues."
"Some were valid and some were not applicable for us based on the scenario."
"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."
"I would like to see the tool’s pricing improved."
"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a pretty costly tool. A lot of customers are resistant to using it."
"Basic support is included with the standard licensing feed but it can be upgraded for an additional cost."
"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution. However, CAST Highlight is less expensive than the CAST AIP, but it remains too expensive and the professional services from CAST are also too expensive. The high price is part of the problem with the CAST solutions."
"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution."
"Checkmarx is comparatively costlier than other products, which is why some of the customers feel reluctant to go for it, though performance-wise, Checkmarx can compete with other products."
"The average deal size was usually anywhere between $120K to $175K on an annual basis, which could be divided across 12 months."
"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."
"It is an expensive solution."
"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."
"Most of my customers opted for a perpetual license. They prefer to pay the highest amount up front for the perpetual license and then pay for additional support annually."
"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."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions are best for your needs.
885,728 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CAST Highlight?
The pricing of CAST Highlight was not considered expensive or cheap, and no specific comment was made about the setup cost.
What needs improvement with CAST Highlight?
The solution provides agnostic blockers for platforms as well as for containerization. Within that containerization, it offers generic blockers. However, my project might require it to provide Wind...
What is your primary use case for CAST Highlight?
For CAST, I use it in cloud migration roadmap and in open source safety issues. These are my two main use cases.
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Checkmarx?
Checkmarx One is a premium solution, so budget accordingly. Make sure you understand how licensing scales with additional applications and users. I advise negotiating multi-year contracts or bundle...
What needs improvement with Checkmarx?
One way Checkmarx One could be improved is if it could automatically run scans every month after implementation. If it is possible to set it in the SAST portal to scan the repositories automaticall...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Wells Fargo, Bank of NY Mellon, Northern Trust, Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, BMW, AT&T, US Army, US Air Force, US Navy, John Hancock, Marsh & McLennan, Ernst & Young, PwC, Volkswagen, Boston Consulting Group, London Stock Exchange, Telefonica, Saur France, Total Energies France, SNCF
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 CAST Highlight vs. Checkmarx One and other solutions. Updated: September 2022.
885,728 professionals have used our research since 2012.