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
26th
Ranking in API Security
7th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Bot Management (8th)
Checkmarx One
Ranking in Application Security Tools
2nd
Ranking in API Security
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Vulnerability Management (13th), 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) (4th), AI Security (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 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 6.8%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One6.8%
Cequence Security0.7%
Other92.5%
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

"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."
"It uses machine learning algorithms to detect attacks and manage API inventory."
"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."
"We use the solution for dynamic application testing."
"Initial setup couldn't be any easier; Checkmarx has good documentation on environment requirements, and as long as you meet those, the installation process takes maybe 30 minutes for an initial setup, perhaps a bit longer if you're adding multiple engines."
"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."
"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."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the SCA module and the code-checking module. Additionally, the solutions are explanatory and helpful."
"The administration in Checkmarx is very good."
"Checkmarx One has positively impacted my organization because in the past, when Checkmarx One scan was not implemented, we faced a lot of issues finding vulnerabilities inside the repository, but now, since we have integrated Checkmarx One into our repository, we can smoothly and very easily find vulnerabilities and manage those effectively."
 

Cons

"It is expensive."
"Latency can be a significant issue in bigger environments, especially since the architecture requires uninterrupted traffic to ensure customers can finish transactions."
"We had to lock the number of CPUs used to not crash the Checkmarx Audit."
"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."
"The cost per user is high and should be reduced."
"Updating and debugging of queries is not very convenient."
"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."
"Creating and editing custom rules in Checkmarx is difficult because the license for the editor comes at an additional cost, and there is a steep learning curve."
"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."
"It takes around 30 to 40 minutes for checking a build. If you can make it within five minutes or 10 minutes, that would be great."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The tool's pricing is fine."
"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."
"The average deal size was usually anywhere between $120K to $175K on an annual basis, which could be divided across 12 months."
"The number of users and coverage for languages will have an impact on the cost of the license."
"We got a special offer for a 30% reduction for three years, after our first year. I think for a real source-code scanning tool, you have to add a lot of money for Open Source Analysis, and AppSec Coach (160 Euro per user per year)."
"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."
"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."
"The license has a vague language around P1 issues and the associated support. Make sure to review these in order to align them with your organizational policies."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
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: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.