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

Cequence Security vs Checkmarx One comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Cequence Security
Ranking in Application Security Tools
25th
Ranking in API Security
7th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Bot Management (7th)
Checkmarx One
Ranking in Application Security Tools
2nd
Ranking in API Security
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Vulnerability Management (12th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Cequence Security is 0.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Checkmarx One is 7.3%, down from 10.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One7.3%
Cequence Security0.7%
Other92.0%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Paulo Estevao - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Sales Engineer at e-Safer
Comprehensive API discovery has enabled us to block bots in real time and improve compliance reporting
Cequence Security can continue evaluating and evolving the machine learning and the AI that they have because attackers are using more AI, making it faster to learn how to attack APIs and business logic. When Cequence Security invests in their AI, they will provide quicker protection that our customers need, and the way that attackers think can be translated into security measures on Cequence Security workflows and baseline. They need to improve faster in the AI environment because the possibility of attackers is growing, which is something that must be improved continuously as we need quicker releases since the market demands it. Regarding accuracy and reliability, the AI has a baselining that allows it to learn from attacks, but it needs to improve more because in the Brazilian market, we have a creative environment for attackers who are familiar with the business logic of our customers, making it easier for them to imitate legitimate users during attacks. Thus, they need to enhance behavior analysis to differentiate themselves from all other products on the market. Latency can be a significant issue in bigger environments, especially since the architecture requires uninterrupted traffic to ensure customers can finish transactions. The defender component managing inline traffic holds all traffic and has mechanisms to control latency, allowing fallback during high-risk situations, but the sensor used for mirroring traffic is outdated and does not work properly.
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

"It uses machine learning algorithms to detect attacks and manage API inventory."
"Cequence Security has positively impacted our organization by giving us a lot of visibility from the market point of view since it competes with much bigger companies such as Akamai, Salt, and Imperva."
"Checkmarx is a nice, pleasant, and relatively easy company to work with."
"Scan reviews can occur during the development lifecycle."
"The scalability of the solution is good."
"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."
"We use the solution for dynamic application testing."
"Overall, the ability to find vulnerabilities in the code is better than the tool that we were using before."
"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"We were using HPE Security Fortify to scan code for security vulnerabilities, but it can scan only after a successful compile, and if the code has dependencies or build errors the scan fails, while with Checkmarx pre-compile scanning is seamless and allows us to scan more code."
 

Cons

"Latency can be a significant issue in bigger environments, especially since the architecture requires uninterrupted traffic to ensure customers can finish transactions."
"It is expensive."
"I expect application security vendors to cover all aspects of application security, including SAST, DAST, and even mobile application security testing. And it would be much better if they provided an on-premises and cloud option for all these main application security features."
"The product can be improved by continuing to expand the application languages and frameworks that can be scanned for vulnerabilities. This includes expanded coverage for mobile applications as well as open-source development tools."
"Checkmarx could improve the speed of the scans."
"Checkmarx One can be improved by reducing noise and improving false positive filtering."
"The Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) feature should be better."
"Checkmarx isn't accredited by the US government for DOD networks, so we've been forced to remove it from the network."
"It needs better role management."
"The accessibility for customized Checkmarx rules is currently limited and should be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Its price is fair. It is in or around the right spot. Ultimately, if the price is wrong, customers won't commit, but they do tend to commit. It is neither too cheap nor too expensive."
"Before implementing the product I would evaluate if it is really necessary to scan so many different languages and frameworks. If not, I think there must be a cheaper solution for scanning Java-only applications (which are 90% of our applications)."
"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."
"We have purchased an annual license to use this solution. The price is reasonable."
"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."
"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."
"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Educational Organization
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cequence Security?
Cequence Security can continue evaluating and evolving the machine learning and the AI that they have because attackers are using more AI, making it faster to learn how to attack APIs and business ...
What is your primary use case for Cequence Security?
My main use case for Cequence Security is that my company is an integrator for Cequence Security, so we deliver this product to our customers in financial, banking, healthcare, and other sectors. A...
What advice do you have for others considering Cequence Security?
I can give Cequence Security a rating of 10 because this product genuinely makes a difference for our customers, and they do not need to lock in to Akamai does, which is significant for our custome...
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 the biggest difference between Veracode and Checkmarx?
According to my experience of using both the tools in different organizations Veracode is a Cloud-native, managed AppSec platform with strong focus on ease of use, it is SaaS delivery, and provide...
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...
 

Also Known As

Cequence ASP, Cequence Unified API Protection Platform
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

T-Mobile, Lbrands, Ulta Beauty
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 Cequence Security vs. Checkmarx One and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.