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

Checkmarx One vs Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 2026

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

Checkmarx One
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
2nd
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) (2nd), Vulnerability Management (12th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (5th), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (3rd)
Continuous Dynamic (formerl...
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
13th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 13.9%, down from 21.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) is 4.2%, up from 3.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One13.9%
Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic)4.2%
Other81.9%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
it_user245412 - PeerSpot reviewer
Executive Vice President, Operations at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
The product and customer service is extremely efficient but I would like to see more research and code examples.
* The continuous online scanning capabilities and reporting features. * The SaaS product features accessible from a browser make managing our online systems easy. * The ability to review security items quickly along with being able to retest vulnerabilities on our schedule make the Sentinel product an invaluable tool for our company’s product security requirements.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"They have some of the best features which make the product wonderful."
"The solution has good performance, it is able to compute in 10 to 15 minutes."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"The visibility the solution gives you is great; it really gives you the ability to see what the root issues in the code actually are."
"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."
"The best features Checkmarx One offers, in my opinion, are that it is easy to use, and there is not much deep diving into this."
"Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%."
"The user interface is excellent. It's very user friendly."
"The SaaS product features accessible from a browser make managing our online systems easy."
 

Cons

"From an administrative standpoint, I would rate Checkmarx with a five out of ten."
"Checkmarx One can be improved on the side of faster scans, especially when our CI pipelines are scanning for vulnerabilities."
"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."
"The lack of ability to review compiled source code. It would then be able to compete with other scanning tools, such as Veracode."
"One area for improvement in Checkmarx is pricing, as it's more expensive than other products."
"The accessibility for customized Checkmarx rules is currently limited and should be improved."
"They should make it more container-friendly and optimized for the CI pipeline. They should make it a little less heavy. Right now, it requires a SQL database, and the way the tool works is that it has an engine and then it has an analysis database in which it stores the information. So, it is pretty heavy from that perspective because you have to have a full SQL Server. They're working on something called Checkmarx Light, which is a slim-down version. They haven't released it yet, but that's what we need. There should be something a little more slimmed down that can just run the analysis and output the results in a format that's readable as opposed to having a full, really big, and thick deployment with a full database server."
"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."
"I would like to see more research and code examples for the vulnerabilities identified to better assist us with our remediation process."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
"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."
"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."
"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)."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Healthcare Company
12%
Construction Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Sentinel Dynamic, WhiteHat Security Application Security Testing, Synopsys WhiteHat Dynamic
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, Checkmarx, OpenText and others in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.