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

Checkmarx One vs Rapid7 AppSpider 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 Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
3rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
79
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Vulnerability Management (16th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (8th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (3rd)
Rapid7 AppSpider
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
31st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.3%, down from 12.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 AppSpider is 0.6%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Checkmarx One10.3%
Rapid7 AppSpider0.6%
Other89.1%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

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.
HW
Marketing Expert at J's communication
Clients benefit from broad authentication and effective crawling but need localization improvements
Our clients use AppSpider to address security concerns for their websites. It is particularly used by customers who require security assessments One of the most valuable features of AppSpider is its broad range of authentication identification, which is a key reason for its utilization.…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is scalable, but other solutions are better."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the SCA module and the code-checking module. Additionally, the solutions are explanatory and helpful."
"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."
"Checkmarx One has positively impacted the organization by providing resolution strategies and indicating which vulnerabilities need to be fixed."
"It shows in-depth code of where actual vulnerabilities are."
"Helps us check vulnerabilities in our SAP Fiori application."
"Checkmarx One has positively impacted our organization as we tend to find vulnerabilities very early in the development cycle."
"The setup is very easy. There is a lot of information in the documents which makes the install not difficult at all."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting, which is compliant with international standards."
"AppSpider's most valuable feature is reporting - everything is stored in the local database so it can be sent to other machines."
"I would say that it is stable, as I am not aware of any major issues."
"When it is set up properly, it can do scanning on web apps with multiple engines automatically."
"The entire solution is interactive and has a point-and-click user experience, which makes it easy to find items or drill down on information. You don't need specialized skills to use the product."
"The initial deployment is very straightforward and simple. The product is stable if configured properly."
"What I like most about AppSpider is that it's easy to use and its automated scan gives me all the details I need to know when it comes to vulnerabilities and their solutions."
"It scans all the components developed within a web application."
 

Cons

"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"Checkmarx could improve the speed of the scans."
"Licensing models and Swift language support are the aspects in which this product needs to improve. Swift is a new language, in which major customers require support for lower prices."
"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."
"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 lack of ability to review compiled source code. It would then be able to compete with other scanning tools, such as Veracode."
"Its pricing model can be improved. Sometimes, it is a little complex to understand its pricing model."
"For Checkmarx One, I think that adding repositories and scanning impromptu code could improve it."
"The tech support is responsive but issues remain unresolved."
"Implementing Rapid7 AppSpider requires scanning and self-identification mechanisms. You can add different types of authentication to each scan."
"AppSpider has some problems with the RAM needed while scanning."
"The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users."
"One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions."
"Support response times are slow and can be improved."
"Integration could be better."
"The product needs to be able to scale for large companies, like ours. We have millions of IP addresses that need to be scanned, and the scalability is not great."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We're using a commercial version of Checkmarx, and we paid for the solution for one year. The price is high and could be reduced."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."
"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."
"​Checkmarx is not a cheap scanning tool, but none of the security tools are cheap. Checkmarx is a powerful scanning tool, and it’s essential to have one of these products."
"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."
"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)."
"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 price of Rapid7 AppSpider cost 9,000 annually but there is limited usage. Large companies are able to negotiate a better price or a better deal for the usage with the vendor."
"The price is pretty fair."
"It is expensive if you want to buy the Enterprise version that is able to scan multiple applications at once."
"AppSpider is closed-source software and you need to acquire a license in order to use it."
"The licensing cost depends on the number of users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Educational Organization
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise45
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

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?
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Rapid7 AppSpider?
The price is not high, but for Japanese customers, localization may incur additional costs.
What needs improvement with Rapid7 AppSpider?
For Japanese customers, localization is needed. The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users.
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 AppSpider?
Our clients use AppSpider to address security concerns for their websites. It is particularly used by customers who require security assessments.
 

Also Known As

No data available
AppSpider
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Microsoft
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Rapid7 AppSpider and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.