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 (13th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (6th), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (4th), AI Security (4th)
Continuous Dynamic (formerl...
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 13.7%, down from 19.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) is 4.5%, up from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One13.7%
Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic)4.5%
Other81.8%
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

"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."
"In my opinion, Checkmarx gives better results, and its protection is better than SonarQube."
"The user interface is modern and nice to use."
"Apart from software scanning, software composition scanning is valuable."
"We are using Checkmarx for analyzing threats."
"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."
"We have used this product to verify the dev department's code in order to minimize security holes."
"Overall, the ability to find vulnerabilities in the code is better than the tool that we were using before."
"The SaaS product features accessible from a browser make managing our online systems easy."
 

Cons

"It provides us with quite a handful of false positive issues. If Checkmarx could reduce this number, it would be a great tool to use."
"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."
"For Checkmarx One, I think that adding repositories and scanning impromptu code could improve it."
"I would like to see the tool’s pricing improved."
"Vulnerability details: Reduce false positive results and improve it by providing more details how I can resolve the vulnerability."
"The reports are good, but they still need to be improved considering what the UI offers."
"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 One is often down when the cloud provider experiences issues. A more fail-tolerant solution needs to be created."
"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

"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."
"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."
"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)."
"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 solution is costly."
"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."
"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."
"It is the right price for quality delivery."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Healthcare Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
9%
 

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, Rapid7 and others in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.