Checkmarx One vs GitHub Code Scanning comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Checkmarx and GitHub are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Checkmarx is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.3, while GitHub is ranked #17 with an average rating of 8.0. Checkmarx holds a 8.3% mindshare in SAST, compared to GitHub’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of GitHub users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx One

Read 81 Checkmarx One reviews

29,420 Views
17,064 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

GitHub Code Scanning

Read 6 GitHub Code Scanning reviews

2,584 Views
2,481 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

GitHub Code Scanning

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Checkmarx One and GitHub Code Scanning compete in the code security category. GitHub Code Scanning seems to have the upper hand, offering enhanced features that justify its higher cost.

Features: Checkmarx One offers excellent integration capabilities and robust analysis tools. Its competitive pricing makes it appealing. GitHub Code Scanning provides a seamless coding experience and highlights vulnerabilities efficiently. It captures more diverse vulnerabilities, which makes it favored for thorough security needs.

Room for Improvement: Checkmarx One requires enhancements in speed and more streamlined reporting. Users also seek better clarity in its outputs. GitHub Code Scanning could benefit from deeper scanning capabilities and a broader range of language support. Users also mention the need for a more intuitive interface to maximize its potential.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Checkmarx One is noted for simple deployment with excellent customer service, providing clear guidance. GitHub Code Scanning has a more complex initial setup but is supported by a strong community. Users appreciate Checkmarx One's easy setup and GitHub's community resources.

Pricing and ROI: Checkmarx One offers budget-friendly setup costs and provides good ROI due to its comprehensive features. GitHub Code Scanning has higher initial costs, but users find its ROI satisfactory, thanks to its feature-rich platform. While Checkmarx One is cost-effective, many find GitHub Code Scanning's extensive functionality worth the investment.

To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx One vs. GitHub Code Scanning Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. GitHub Code Scanning

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 913,683 peers since 2012

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 Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

2nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (2nd), Vulnerability Management (12th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (5th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (3rd)

GitHub Code Scanning

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

17th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 8.3%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GitHub Code Scanning is 1.2%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Checkmarx One	8.3%
GitHub Code Scanning	1.2%
Other	90.5%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Shahzad Shahzad

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.

Read full review

AbhishekKumar20

Software Development Manager at Amazon

Code scanning identifies vulnerabilities quickly and improves team response with minimal setup

I have been using Git for approximately 13-14 years. I have used GitHub Code Scanning for about three to four years. The primary purpose is to identify any vulnerability in the code itself. The system logs vulnerabilities that we can immediately examine to see all the error-prone areas. The AI functionalities include predefined agents that scan through and immediately provide responses regarding the best nomenclature or code coverage percentage. It's actually a one-time setup, and the team benefits as long as they push code and changes in the repository itself. Every time we push something, we immediately check the total deviation, whether our code coverage has improved, or if any vulnerability has been identified. There is always a metrics dashboard that we can see and identify. Primarily, GitHub is used for doing the versioning itself in the repository. With vulnerability functionality being provided and AI agents available, it makes a complete package. As soon as we publish our code, we immediately get to know the test code coverage. This immediately informs us about all the vulnerable areas which are not being fully tested. If we address those areas, most vulnerabilities are resolved. Even after tests are added, if by any chance the test is not treated cleanly or corner cases are missed, GitHub Code Scanning immediately flags those corners. It's always beneficial to have because it's not humanly possible to check all corner case scenarios, but as a system where they diagnose each line item, that's very helpful.

Read full review

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 Checkmarx are difficult to pinpoint because of the way the functionalities and the features are intertwined, it's difficult to say which part of them I prefer most. You initiate the scan, you have a scan, you have the review set, and reporting, they all work together as one whole process. It's not like accounting software, where you have the different features, et cetera."

"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."

"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."

"It is a stable product."

"It gives the proper code flow of vulnerabilities and the number of occurrences."

"The SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."

"After scanning, it shows in-depth code of where actual vulnerabilities are, which helps us to analyze them."

"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."

More Checkmarx One pros

"The static code analysis capability in GitHub Code Scanning is a very powerful feature, providing the ability to identify vulnerabilities and ensure code quality."

"The solution helps identify vulnerabilities by understanding how ports communicate with applications running on a system. Ports are like house numbers; to visit someone's house, you must know their number. Similarly, ports are used to communicate with applications. For example, if you want to use an HTTP web server, you must use port 80. It is the port on which the web application or your server listens for incoming requests."

"We use GitHub Code Scanning mostly for source code management."

"It's very scalable, very easy to handle, and very intuitive."

"GitHub Code Spaces brings significant value with its simplicity and ease of use."

"GitHub Code Scanning has positively impacted my organization as it helps us recognize errors and avoid many later issues which may arise."

Cons

"Checkmarx One is often down when the cloud provider experiences issues. A more fail-tolerant solution needs to be created."

"Meta data is always needed."

"This solution is not very easily scalable, and seems to lack the capability to manage a high volume of applications."

"We can run only one project at a 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."

"We have received some feedback from our customers who are receiving a large number of false positives."

"We are trying to find out if there is a way to identify the run-time null values. I am analyzing different tools to check if there is any tool that supports run-time null value identification, but I don't think any of the tools in the market currently supports this feature. It would be helpful if Checkmarx can identify and throw an exception for a null value at the run time. It would make things a lot easier if there is a way for Checkmarx to identify nullable fields or hard-coded values in the code. The accessibility for customized Checkmarx rules is currently limited and should be improved. In addition, it would be great if Checkmarx can do static code and dynamic code validation. It does a lot of security-related scanning, and it should also do static code and dynamic code validation. Currently, for security-related validation, we are using Checkmarx, and for static code and dynamic code validation, we are using some other tools. We are spending money on different tools. We can pay a little extra money and use Checkmarx for everything."

"I would like to see the tool’s pricing improved."

More Checkmarx One cons

"GitHub Code Scanning should add more templates."

"At times it becomes very annoying as it highlights certain things which are intuitive. They require code coverage for those aspects as an extra overhead."

"In my opinion, areas of GitHub Code Scanning that could be improved include that a few things are not visible to us, such as where it stores data and which path."

"When running code scans, GitHub Code Scanning provides recommendations for probable fixes. However, integrating a feature where developers receive real-time highlights of vulnerabilities when checking in or merging a PR would be beneficial."

"One area for improvement could be the ability to have an AI system digest the reports generated from code scanning and provide a summary. Currently, the reports can be extensive, and users may overlook details, such as outdated libraries, which could be highlighted for attention."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."

"The tool's pricing is fine."

"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."

"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."

"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."

"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."

"It is an expensive solution."

"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."

More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice

"The minimum pricing for the tool is five dollars a month."

"GitHub Code Scanning is a moderately priced solution."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

Outsourcing Company

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

Outsourcing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	32
Midsize Enterprise	9
Large Enterprise	46

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitHub Code Scanning?

The organization pays for the license of GitHub Code Scanning, but specific price details are unknown.

See all answers

What needs improvement with GitHub Code Scanning?

In my opinion, areas of GitHub Code Scanning that could be improved include that a few things are not visible to us, such as where it stores data and which path. There is a separate team for that w...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering GitHub Code Scanning?

I am an end user only here with GitHub Code Scanning. I currently might be using the latest version of GitHub Code Scanning, but I don't remember the specific version. I have not utilized the real-...

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs Checkmarx One

Compared 24% of the time

Veracode vs Checkmarx One

Compared 3% of the time

Checkmarx SAST vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

Snyk vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

Fortify Software Security Center vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

More Checkmarx One Competitors

SonarQube vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 17% of the time

Coverity Static vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 9% of the time

Aikido Security vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 5% of the time

Semgrep vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 4% of the time

OWASP Zap vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 4% of the time

More GitHub Code Scanning Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One

September 2026

Download Checkmarx One product report

Buyer's Guide

GitHub Code Scanning

September 2026

Download GitHub Code Scanning product report

Overview

Checkmarx One delivers robust security through seamless integration with SCM and CI/CD tools, ensuring reliable SAST and SCA. Primarily used by organizations for vulnerability detection, it supports cloud and on-premises deployment to enhance secure coding practices.

Checkmarx One provides organizations with comprehensive tools for secure software development, integrating effectively with CI/CD pipelines to scan thousands of applications. Its capabilities extend to identifying vulnerabilities in both code bases and third-party software. Enhancing workflow by supporting SCM solutions, it assists in maintaining secure coding standards and compliance. While excelling in various areas, it requires improvements in scan speed, reduction of false positives, and broader platform integration, particularly for COBOL and Swift. Its pricing model is noted as high, and demand exists for better tutorials and documentation.

What are the key features of Checkmarx One?

Comprehensive Integration: Seamlessly connects with SCM, CI/CD tools to streamline security workflows.
Accurate SAST and SCA: Precisely identifies vulnerabilities down to the exact line of code.
Custom Rules Configuration: Allows tailored security measures to match specific needs.
Quick Scanning: Provides fast analysis to speed up the development process.
Automated Code Remediation: Helps in efficiently fixing code vulnerabilities.

What benefits should users expect in reviews?

Improved Security: Enhances code safety, reducing vulnerabilities efficiently.
Effective False Positivity Management: Optimizes time spent on genuine issues.
Enhanced Development Processes: Integrates smoothly to boost secure coding initiatives.
Comprehensive Language Support: Facilitates scanning in multiple programming languages, accommodating diverse needs.

Industries implement Checkmarx One for secure coding compliance and vulnerability management across varying environments, choosing between cloud and on-premises deployment based on requirements. Its extensive language support and integration with DevSecOps practices make it a popular choice for organizations aiming to enhance software security.

Checkmarx

Code scanning is a feature that you use to analyze the code in a GitHub repository to find security vulnerabilities and coding errors. Any problems identified by the analysis are shown in GitHub.

GitHub

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. GitHub Code Scanning

September 2026

Free Report: Checkmarx One vs. GitHub Code Scanning

Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. GitHub Code Scanning and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx One vs. GitHub Code Scanning report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.