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

Checkmarx One vs SUSE Rancher comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 Container Security
15th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (16th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (8th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (2nd)
SUSE Rancher
Ranking in Container Security
33rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 2.3%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE Rancher is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Checkmarx One2.3%
SUSE Rancher0.5%
Other97.2%
Container Security
 

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.
reviewer2785698 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Solutions Engineer at a leisure / travel company with 501-1,000 employees
Centralized management has unified multi‑cluster operations across clouds and data centers
There are multiple areas where SUSE Rancher can improve. The most pressing issue that I found in SUSE Rancher is that it is a bit slow. Compared with Komodor, it is very slow. Maintenance is also very high, and we require regular maintenance. Non-experts in Kubernetes cannot handle this application. It is a bit less stable compared with other tools in the market. In most regions, there is scope for improvement. There is a lot of scope for improvement, and there are a lot of issues in the tool, such as addressing the errors, addressing the stability, and addressing the reliability. It is a very good tool, so that is why I gave it a nine. However, it is not a great tool to get a ten. It is a bit costly compared with other tools in the market.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Checkmarx One has positively impacted my organization because in the past, when Checkmarx One scan was not implemented, we faced a lot of issues finding vulnerabilities inside the repository, but now, since we have integrated Checkmarx One into our repository, we can smoothly and very easily find vulnerabilities and manage those effectively."
"It is a stable product."
"The solution improved the efficiency of our code security reviews. It helps tremendously because it finds hundreds of potential problems sometimes."
"The main benefit to using this solution is that we find vulnerabilities in our software before the development cycle is complete."
"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"One of the most valuable features is it is flexible."
"The identification of verification-related security vulnerabilities is really important and one of the key things. It also identifies vulnerabilities for any kind of third-party tool coming into the system or any third-party tools that you are using, which is very useful for avoiding random hacking."
"The reports are very good because they include details on the code level, and make suggestions about how to fix the problems."
"Rancher Desktop provides support for Kubernetes setup on local machines."
"SUSE Rancher has positively impacted my organization as productivity is the main point, and the productivity has improved because the main project goal was to finish the project faster, which was particularly important since we have many applications."
"SUSE Rancher has positively impacted my organization with increased efficiency in a 10x manner."
"The most valuable features of SUSE Rancher include the user interface and the display features."
"SUSE Rancher has made things easier for my team and organization by reducing errors, as I use it every day of the week, and it shows us issues through dashboards."
"SUSE Rancher is best used for large-scale applications such as ours; it manages very high-end infrastructure, and it has very good customer support, and it is very easy to understand in terms of usage."
"Rancher Desktop provides support for Kubernetes setup on local machines."
"SUSE Rancher is best used for large-scale applications such as ours; it manages very high-end infrastructure, has very good customer support, and is very easy to understand in terms of usage."
 

Cons

"Checkmarx could improve the REST APIs by including automation."
"Integration into the SDLC (i.e. support for last version of SonarQube) could be added."
"Implementing a blackout time for any user or teams: Needs improvement."
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"Meta data is always needed."
"Creating and editing custom rules in Checkmarx is difficult because the license for the editor comes at an additional cost, and there is a steep learning curve."
"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."
"With Checkmarx, normally you need to use one tool for quality and you need to use another tool for security. I understand that Checkmarx is not in the parity space because it's totally different, but they could include some free features or recommendations too."
"There are a lot of issues in the tool, such as addressing the errors, addressing the stability, and addressing the reliability."
"I have noticed that SUSE Rancher's GUI is slow because we have more than 1,000 pods, and when searching for a pod name, the page takes some time to load."
"Some initial setup and configuration were required by the admin side for enabling security policies, which were not supported initially."
"There are a lot of issues in the tool, such as addressing the errors, addressing the stability, and addressing the reliability."
"Additional features for a paid solution should be included, such as more detailed insights, better graphics, and an improved user interface."
"Some initial setup and configuration were required by the admin side for enabling security policies, which were not supported initially."
"I wish the container could be more lightweight so that anyone can test and verify SUSE Rancher Prime."
 

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."
"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."
"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."
"The price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is expensive."
"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."
"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."
"The pricing is competitive and provides a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) for achieving application security."
"The tool's pricing is fine."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
5%
Outsourcing Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
 

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 SUSE Rancher?
I do not know about the pricing, setup cost, and licensing information because another segment is responsible for this.
What needs improvement with SUSE Rancher?
I think SUSE Rancher can be improved, particularly because SUSE Manager, SUSE Rancher Manager, or SUSE Rancher Prime runs on containers. I wish the container could be more lightweight so that anyon...
What is your primary use case for SUSE Rancher?
My main use case for SUSE Rancher is managing multi-clusters, such as Kubernetes platform-based Kubernetes, GKE, AKS, and EKS. That was the main purpose. For managing those clusters with SUSE Ranch...
 

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 Checkmarx One vs. SUSE Rancher and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.