Checkmarx One vs Invicti vs OWASP Zap comparison

Read 31 Invicti reviews

5,734 Views
3,383 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

8,774 Views
8,072 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One, Invicti, and OWASP Zap based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST).

To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: May 2026).

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Download the complete report

Helped 896,942 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:

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 9.2%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Invicti is 1.8%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 2.9%, down from 5.1% 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	9.2%
Invicti	1.8%
OWASP Zap	2.9%
Other	86.1%

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

Valavan Sivgalingam

Senior Manager, Security Engineering at ESS

Dynamic testing regularly identifies web vulnerabilities and has strong false positive confirmations

It has good false positive confirmations, confirmed issues identification, and proof of exploit-related features as part of it. We use Invicti for these things in our portfolios. The solution includes Proof-Based Scanning technology. Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios. For both the API endpoints and web applications, we do regular testing on a monthly basis for all our releases. Invicti does a good job. The only concern is on the performance side, but other than that, we find it really helpful in identifying web vulnerabilities. A full scan takes more time based on your website and other factors, but for us, it takes more than two to three days. The scan performance can be improved upon. When we check with them, they discuss proof-based scanning and related aspects. However, there could be intermittent results that could help us.

Read full review

Amit Beniwal

Project Manager at Al Hassan LLC

Simplifies vulnerability discovery and has high quality support

There are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores. Sometimes, a vulnerability initially categorized as high severity may be reduced to medium or low over time after security patches are applied. This alignment with the present severity score and CVSS score could be improved.

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

"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 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."

"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."

"The most valuable feature of Checkmarx is the user interface, it is very easy to use, and we do not need to configure anything, we only have to scan to see the results."

"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 use the solution for dynamic application testing."

"Checkmarx One has definitely helped us to save time and reduce the need for additional security resources, meaning employees."

"One of the most valuable features is it is flexible."

More Checkmarx One pros

"It has improved the security of our code by scanning it and finding security defects."

"The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan."

"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."

"Its ability to crawl a web application is quite different than another similar scanner, and sometimes it can find more vulnerabilities that another scanner can’t."

"When we try to manually exploit the vulnerabilities, it often takes time to realize what's going on and what needs to be done."

"Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms. This feature expands the attack surface."

"The scanner is light on the network and does not impact the network when scans are running."

"I'd recommend Netsparker for anyone who wants to make a security assessment for web applications."

More Invicti pros

"If you're a company and you've got your own websites, internally and externally, it's great."

"The application scanning feature is the most valuable feature."

"We use OWASP Zap for web application security scanning."

"You can run it against multiple targets."

"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."

"The HUD, Heads Up Display, is a good feature; it provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."

"The interface is easy to use."

"The product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"Integration into the SDLC (i.e. support for last version of SonarQube) could be added."

"I really would like to integrate it as a service along with the SAP HANA Cloud Platform. It will then be easy to use it directly as a service."

"They can support the remaining languages that are currently not supported. They can also create a different model that can identify zero-day attacks. They can work on different patterns to identify and detect zero-day vulnerability attacks."

"The Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) feature should be better."

"From an administrative standpoint, I would rate Checkmarx with a five out of ten."

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

"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."

"The default module that provides statistics is basic, and you need more elaborate information to do vulnerability management."

More Checkmarx One cons

"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."

"Invicti's reporting capabilities need enhancement."

"Improvement could be made in the area of production."

"Perhaps the custom attack preparation screen might be improved."

"Speed: It spends about one hour on scanning; I would like it to be less than 30 minutes."

"They don't really provide the proof of concept up to the level that we need in our organization. We are a consultancy firm, and we provide consultancy for the implementation and deployment solutions to our customers. When you run the scans and the scan is completed, it only shows the proof of exploit, which really doesn't work because the tool is running the scan and exploiting on the read-only form. You don't really know whether it is actually giving the proof of exploit. We cannot prove it manually to a customer that the exploit is genuine. It is really hard to perform it manually and prove it to the concerned development, remediation, and security teams. It is currently missing the static application security part of the application security, especially web application security. It would be really cool if they can integrate a SAS tool with their dynamic one."

"The licensing model should be improved to be more cost-effective. There are URL restrictions that consume our license. Compared to other DAST solutions and task tools like WebInspect and Burp Enterprise, Invicti is very expensive. The solution’s scanning time is also very long compared to other DAST tools. It might be due to proof-based scanning."

"The support's response time could be faster since we are in different time zones."

More Invicti cons

"It would be a great improvement if they could include a marketplace to add extra features to the tool."

"The work that it does in the limited scope is good, but the scope is very limited in terms of the scanning features. The number of things it tests or finds is limited. They need to make it a more of a mainstream tool that people can use, and they can even think about having it on a proprietary basis. They need to increase the coverage of the scan and the results that it finds. That has always been Zap's limitation. Zap is a very good tool for a beginner, but once you start moving up the ladder where you want further details and you want your scan to show more in-depth results, Zap falls short because its coverage falls short. It does not have the capacity to do more."

"It would be ideal if I could try some pre-built deployment scenarios so that I don't have to worry about whether the configuration sector team is doing it right or wrong. That would be very helpful."

"As security evolves, we would like DevOps built into it. As of now, Zap does not provide this."

"Too many false positives; test reports could be improved."

"If there was an easier to understand exactly what has been checked and what has not been checked, it would make this solution better. We have to trust that it has checked all known vulnerabilities but it's a bit hard to see after the scanning."

"Reporting format has no output, is cluttered and very long."

"We get too many false positives and that should definitely be improved."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is competitive and provides a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) for achieving application security."

"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."

"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."

"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."

"The tool's pricing is fine."

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

"It is not expensive, but sometimes, their pricing model or licensing model is not very clear. There are similar variables, such as projects or developers, and sometimes, it is a little bit confusing."

"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."

More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice

"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."

"Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license."

"We are using an NFR license and I do not know the exact price of the NFR license. I think 20 FQDN for three years would cost around 35,000 US Dollars."

"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."

"Invicti is best suited for large enterprises. I don't think small and medium-sized businesses can afford it. Maintenance costs aren't that great."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"It is competitive in the security market."

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

"It's free and open, currently under the Apache 2 license. If ZAP does what you need it to do, selling a free solution is a very easy."

"OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate."

"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."

"The tool is open source."

"It is open source, and we can scan freely."

"This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."

"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."

"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."

More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice

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

896,942 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

University

Manufacturing 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

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	13

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	22

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 ...

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 Ap...

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 additi...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?

The setup cost is pretty competitive. For example, if you want to talk about the SAST license, it comes to about $150...

What needs improvement with Invicti?

At this time, there is nothing that comes to mind. However, most of the products in the market are pretty much neck-t...

What is your primary use case for Invicti?

I have worked on a couple of products, specifically in web application security. I have worked on Invicti, and with r...

Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?

OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OWASP Zap?

OWASP might be cost-effective, however, people prefer to use the free edition available as open source.

What needs improvement with OWASP Zap?

The improvement that has to be done for APIs focuses on manual activities where the feature exists, but it is not at ...

SonarQube vs Checkmarx One

Comparisons

Compared 33% of the time

Veracode vs Checkmarx One

Compared 3% of the time

Checkmarx SAST vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

Fortify Software Security Center vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

Fortify Application Defender vs Checkmarx One

Compared 1% of the time

More Checkmarx One Competitors

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 9% of the time

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

SonarQube vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

Bright vs Invicti

Compared 4% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 11% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap

Compared 10% of the time

SonarQube vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

Pentest-Tools.com vs OWASP Zap

Compared 3% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Checkmarx One

Download Checkmarx One product report

Download Invicti product report

OWASP Zap

Download OWASP Zap product report

Also Known As

No data available

Netsparker

No data available

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

Invicti offers advanced web application security testing focused on identifying vulnerabilities like SQL injection and cross-site scripting. Its Proof-Based Scanning minimizes false positives and integrates seamlessly with CI/CD pipelines, making it an effective tool for enterprise environments.

Invicti provides comprehensive scanning capabilities that include detecting and verifying critical vulnerabilities and security data consolidation. Its scalable scanning engine and robust API support allow for flexible testing across diverse environments, including web and API testing. Despite some drawbacks like limited single sign-on integration and slow scanning speeds for large applications, Invicti remains a popular choice for automating security assessments, ensuring compliance with standards like OWASP Top 10, PCI DSS, and GDPR.

What are the key features of Invicti?

Comprehensive Vulnerability Scanning: Detects vulnerabilities like SQL injection and XSS.
Proof-Based Scanning: Confirms exploitability and reduces false positives.
CI/CD Integration: Seamlessly integrates with development pipelines.
Security Data Consolidation: Centralizes data for better insights.
User-Friendly Interface: Facilitates easy analysis and reporting.
Scalable Scanning Engine: Supports testing in enterprise environments.
Robust API Support: Enhances flexibility in testing.

What benefits and ROI should users look for in reviews?

Proactive Security: Actively identifies and verifies vulnerabilities to prevent breaches.
Regulatory Compliance: Helps maintain compliance with standards like PCI DSS and GDPR.
Efficient Vulnerability Management: Aids in prioritizing remediation efforts.
Integration Capabilities: Streamlines processes with CI/CD pipeline compatibility.

In industries like finance, healthcare, and e-commerce, Invicti is implemented to bolster security through automated vulnerability assessments. Its ability to provide insightful reports and remediation suggestions assists companies in efficiently managing security risks and achieving compliance with critical regulatory standards.

OWASP Zap is a free and open-source web application security scanner.

The solution helps developers identify vulnerabilities in their web applications by actively scanning for common security issues.

With its user-friendly interface and powerful features, Zap is a popular choice among developers for ensuring the security of their web applications.

OWASP

Sample Customers

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

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank

1. Google 2. Microsoft 3. IBM 4. Amazon 5. Facebook 6. Twitter 7. LinkedIn 8. Netflix 9. Adobe 10. PayPal 11. Salesforce 12. Cisco 13. Oracle 14. Intel 15. HP 16. Dell 17. VMware 18. Symantec 19. McAfee 20. Citrix 21. Red Hat 22. Juniper Networks 23. SAP 24. Accenture 25. Deloitte 26. Ernst & Young 27. PwC 28. KPMG 29. Capgemini 30. Infosys 31. Wipro 32. TCS

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)