Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Checkmarx One vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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 Application Security Tools
3rd
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
3rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (24th), Static Code Analysis (3rd), API Security (5th), DevSecOps (4th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (9th)
PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
10th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.0%, down from 14.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 2.2%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Syed Hasan - PeerSpot reviewer
Partner experiences excellent technical support and seamless initial setup
In my opinion, if we are able to extract or show the report, and because everything is going towards agent tech and GenAI, it would be beneficial if it could get integrated with our code base and do the fix automatically. It could suggest how the code base is written and automatically populate the source code with three different solution options to choose from. This would be really helpful.
Anuradha.Kapoor Kapoor - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers efficient scanning of entire websites but presence of false positive bugs, leading to time-consuming efforts in distinguishing real bugs from false alarms
We have found that so many times, false positive bugs are there, and then we spend a lot of time basically separating them from real bugs. So that's the reason we are looking for some other tool. So we were in discussion with Acunetix. Therefore, the false positive rate is, like, something that we would like to improve. What we are looking for is if this false positive rate goes down because we were OWASP Zap tool users, which was free anyway. But there were a lot of false positives there, and we used to spend a lot of time, like, for security reasons, reproducing those bugs for the development team to fix it. So then we thought, okay, why not we go with the tool? Even if it is not very expensive. But still, every year, we have to renew the license. And we got this tool. Again, we found that in this tool also, even if it is less, there are still a lot of false positive bugs out there. So we again have to spend so much time. So we hired a security tester, who was basically using Acunetix in his previous company for almost three years, and then you said that in that scanning is very slow. The scanning is also slow. Like, sometimes the site scan takes eight hours, six to eight hours. Yeah. And whereas in Acunetix, it took three to four hours. And plus, there are no false positives. I'm not saying none but there's very little. But here, the rate sometimes is very high. These are the two features I think we would like to improve further.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The process of remediating software security vulnerabilities can now be performed (ongoing) as portions of the application are being built in advance of being compiled."
"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"It gives the proper code flow of vulnerabilities and the number of occurrences."
"Checkmarx has helped us deliver more secure products. We are able to do static code analysis with the tool before shipping our code to production. When the integration is in the pipeline, this tool gives us early notifications on code fixes."
"It can integrate very well with DAST solutions. So both of them are combined into an integrated solution for customers running application security."
"The product's most valuable feature is static code and supply chain effect analysis. It provides a lot of visibility."
"The most valuable feature for me is the Jenkins Plugin."
"The most valuable feature is the application security. It also has a reasonable price."
"It was easy to learn."
"Some of the extensions, available using Burp Extender, are also very good and we have found issues by using them."
"The suite testing models are very good. It's very secure."
"I have found the best features to be the performance and there are a lot of additional plugins available."
"It is useful for scanning and tracing activities."
"The most valuable feature of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is the dashboard. It is very informative and you can receive all the information you need in one place. It's clear, well-defined, and organized. Anybody without any cybersecurity can use it."
"It offers flexibility, macros, and features to reduce the effort required for authenticated sessions."
 

Cons

"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."
"I would like the product to include more debugging and developed tools. It needs to also add enhancements on the coding side."
"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."
"Checkmarx could improve the solution reports and false positives. The false positives could be reduced. For example, we have alerts that are tagged as vulnerabilities but when you drill down they are not."
"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 Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) feature should be better."
"Checkmarx needs to be more scalable for large enterprise companies."
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional could improve the static code review."
"The pricing of the solution is quite high."
"It would be beneficial to have privileged access management as a part of Burp Suite Professional."
"The Initial setup is a bit complex."
"Improvement should be done as per the requirements of customers."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"There could be an improvement in the API security testing. There is another tool called Postman and if we had a built-in portal similar to Postman which captures the API, we would be able to generate the API traffic. Right now we need a Postman tool and the Burp Suite for performing API tests. It would be a huge benefit to be able to do it in a single UI."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is costly."
"The price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is expensive."
"The average deal size was usually anywhere between $120K to $175K on an annual basis, which could be divided across 12 months."
"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."
"We have a subscription license that is on a yearly basis, and it's a pretty competitive solution."
"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."
"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)."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"The cost is approximately $500 for a single license, and there are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fees."
"PortSwigger is a bit expensive."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is an expensive solution."
"There are multiple versions available of PortSwigger Burp Suite, such as enterprise, commercial, professional, and beginners."
"The pricing of the solution is reasonable. We only need to pay for the annual subscription. I rate the pricing five out of ten."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution, which is neither cheap nor expensive."
"The yearly cost is about $300."
"For a country such as Sri Lanka, the pricing is not reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 do you like most about Checkmarx?
Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Checkmarx?
The pricing is relatively expensive due to the product's quality and performance, but it is worth it.
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 with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
What do you like most about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The solution helped us discover vulnerabilities in our applications.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
I find the price of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional to be very cost-efficient.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Burp
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.