No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Checkmarx One vs Wallarm NG WAF comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 4, 2025

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 API Security
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Vulnerability Management (12th), Container Security (14th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (3rd)
Wallarm NG WAF
Ranking in API Security
14th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (39th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the API Security category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 7.1%, up from 6.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Wallarm NG WAF is 3.3%, down from 4.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Security Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One7.1%
Wallarm NG WAF3.3%
Other89.6%
API 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.
it_user796242 - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Engineer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
Helps us to monitor attacks to our sites and prevents a lot of them
Set up Wallarm as a reverse proxy. Do not replace your web server. Use Wallarm first in monitoring mode, then learn from Wallarm which type of request is false positive and which type of request is not. This process takes a couple of weeks for very highly-loaded web applications (few millions of unique visitors in one month). Then you can turn Wallarm into blocking mode and everything will be fine. Do not forget to build a monitoring system, the wave, and API for it. Before we started using Wallarm, I already knew Ivan (CEO) and Stepan (COO) from a couple of years before. Ivan had his own security company and Stepan was working on a Russian security magazine called Xakep. They told us that they wanted to create a new WAF and already had a working version of it. They asked me to test it. We did tests, and it was really good. After few month after testing, we signed an agreement. Our choice was made not because we knew these guys for a long time, but because the product was really cool and we were glad to start using it as one of the first on the market!

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's been a very positive experience overall."
"If you really are worried about your business, i.e. about your development sites or development environments, Checkmarx is a great solution."
"What I like best about Checkmarx is that it has fewer false positives than other products, giving you better results."
"By using the automated testing in Checkmarx One, we have saved around one or two days in a full week of our team because we have a lot of code to do with seven markets."
"Checkmarx One has positively impacted the organization by providing resolution strategies and indicating which vulnerabilities need to be fixed."
"Once you implement Checkmarx One, you can be sure that you're getting value from the solution almost immediately because Checkmarx One also handles false positives very effectively, saving you time and saving your developers time."
"The solution is always updating to continuously add items that create a level of safety from vulnerabilities, and they are always ahead of the game when it comes to finding any vulnerabilities within the database, so I am assured that when I am scanning my product those vulnerabilities are identified at very initial stages, giving my development team more time to react."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"Perimeter control and active vulnerability scanner are the most valuable features."
"They are the only solution that fits our success criteria and business objectives: WAF must have a low (<5%) false negative rate and be ready to protect from all well-known web attacks."
"Vulnerability scanner and WAF are valuable features."
"The most powerful feature is the ability to first learn what type of query to make to your web application when it is attacked and what type of query creates a false positive to your app."
"Helps us to monitor situation in regards to attacks to our sites and prevents a lot of them."
"With active threat detection, we are no longer over-swamped with tons of useless events."
 

Cons

"I expect application security vendors to cover all aspects of application security, including SAST, DAST, and even mobile application security testing. And it would be much better if they provided an on-premises and cloud option for all these main application security features."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"Some were valid and some were not applicable for us based on the scenario."
"The interactive application security testing, or IAST, the interactive part where you're looking at an application that lives in a runtime environment on a server or virtual machine, needs improvement."
"The default module that provides statistics is basic, and you need more elaborate information to do vulnerability management."
"I would like the product to include more debugging and developed tools. It needs to also add enhancements on the coding side."
"Some of the descriptions were found to be missing or were not as elaborate as compared to other descriptions. Although, they could be found across various standard sources but it would save a lot of time for developers, if this was fixed."
"They should make it more container-friendly and optimized for the CI pipeline. They should make it a little less heavy."
"Wallarm uses a learning mechanism to detect attacks and to avoid false positives. If Wallarm blocks some illegitimate request, then you can go to the management console and mark this request as false positive, but sometimes this does not work properly."
"The biggest problem for us was the stability and speed using the first version of Wallarm. Now, it is fine."
"It needs more customization in PDF reports."
"There were several stability issues during the first pilot."
"Technical support is 6 or 7 out of 10. Sometimes we have had trouble with communication and understanding."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."
"The average deal size was usually anywhere between $120K to $175K on an annual basis, which could be divided across 12 months."
"The tool's pricing is fine."
"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."
"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
"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)."
"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."
"​Pricing must be cheaper than the competition and the licensing must be good.​"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Security solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Government
11%
Insurance Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
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.
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...
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Wallarm NG-WAF
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Panasonic. Miro. Rappi. Wargaming. Gannett. Omio. Acronis. Workforce Software. Tipalti. SEMRush.
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Wallarm NG WAF and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.