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

Checkmarx One vs Xygeni comparison

Sponsored
 

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

Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto N...
Sponsored
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (29th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (13th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (16th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (11th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (12th), Software Supply Chain Security (6th), Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (6th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (5th)
Checkmarx One
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
3rd
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 (16th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (4th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), AI Security (1st)
Xygeni
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
12th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (22nd), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (15th), Software Supply Chain Security (12th)
 

Featured Reviews

SJ
Technical Solutions Architect at IBM
Cloud security has improved as AI-driven runtime protection detects threats and reduces incidents
In my opinion, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks could be improved or enhanced in various ways. I don't have an idea about that yet because for that you actually need to use two or three different other tools to make a basic comparison. If you ask me how good the tool is, I would fairly rate it quite high. The tool is very popular, and customers can already see that it is one of the cloud leaders in the security space. The platform had a very good feature which provides documentation links about how to use a specific feature on the UI. It takes you to the proper documentation page where it suggests what to do and tells you about the steps that need to be done for a resource deployment. My thoughts about improving the product which I believe could greatly aid vendors is that it used to be a very user-friendly tool, but now they have incorporated everything under one umbrella. It has XDR, XSOAR, and Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. Before, we used to have separate modules and separate environments for each of these capabilities or features. Right now, it is a little complex and users would take their own time to know the tool better. This is something that would have been way better, but I would say there would be different opinions on this. Talking about user-friendliness, it has decreased now.
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.
AI
Business development manager at RSsecurity
Unified monitoring has reduced alert noise and provides accurate, proactive application security
Xygeni was highly effective for us, but there are areas where improvements could be made. More customization options for dashboards and reports would help teams tailor the platform to their specific metrics and workflows. I also occasionally encounter DevOps tools that are not yet supported natively. Expanded coverage for niche or emerging tools would make onboarding even smoother. These points, however, are minor compared to the overall value the platform delivers, especially given the strength of its AI-driven detection, remediation, and supply chain protection capabilities. It would also be an improvement for licensing with regard to on-premise variants. Perhaps we could have an on-premise option for standard subscription.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Previously with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, I deployed this product for one of my customers, and after three to four months, they said that previously they had around four hours of MTTR, and now it has reduced to just 15 to 20 minutes."
"The most valuable features I have found in Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks are those that we provided to customers in a stock environment, as we have done some POCs and tried to check how it can help different organizations, and this same solution has been positioned for multiple customers."
"The most beneficial aspect of Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Palo Alto in general is that there is a single platform for all cloud providers for securitization."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks' cloud runtime security in terms of stopping attacks in real time is impressive."
"From a technical standpoint or pricing, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a stronger solution in the market at the moment compared to other products from ConnectWise or Symantec."
"I have absolutely seen improvements in our incident close rates, with mean time to detect and respond reduced significantly, sometimes by at least forty to fifty percent."
"The AI and automation features in detecting and responding to high-risk threats are impressive; it's one of the best tools regarding AI technology and unifies security in one platform in real-time, improving vulnerability analysis, incident response, and compliance reporting."
"I have seen several benefits from using Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks: It was easy to use and easy to migrate from the IBM platform."
"The most valuable feature is that it actually identifies the different criteria you can set to meet whatever standards you're trying to get your system accredited for."
"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."
"I like that you don't have to compile the code in order to execute static code analysis, so it's very handy."
"It can integrate very well with DAST solutions. So both of them are combined into an integrated solution for customers running application security."
"The solution allows us to create custom rules for code checks."
"Overall, the ability to find vulnerabilities in the code is better than the tool that we were using before."
"We were using HPE Security Fortify to scan code for security vulnerabilities, but it can scan only after a successful compile. If the code has dependencies or build errors, the scan fails. With Checkmarx, pre-compile scanning is seamless. This allows us to scan more code."
"The administration in Checkmarx is very good."
"The visibility of our open-source supply chain dependencies and real-time detection of vulnerabilities have been invaluable."
"Since using Xygeni, the time to review vulnerabilities has decreased."
"Xygeni provides a comprehensive and developer-friendly approach to securing the entire software supply chain."
"The best Xygeni feature is the ability to filter what is truly important, which really helps me focus on the key vulnerabilities in the software that I am building."
 

Cons

"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is creating some confusion in terms of names because this is recent."
"The negative aspects or areas for improvement in the product include the fact that the cost might be a bit high, which challenges commercials, but not technically."
"As per my experience with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, the UI could be simpler."
"My thoughts about improving the product which I believe could greatly aid vendors is that it used to be a very user-friendly tool, but now they have incorporated everything under one umbrella."
"From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market."
"Overall, I rate Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks as an eight out of ten. I think that it could improve on price, as I know that the Google solution has the best price, and this is one of the conditions."
"In my opinion, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks can be improved by addressing forensic information collection and storage, although I cannot suggest specific things right now, based on what customers might need."
"The pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions."
"It provides us with quite a handful of false positive issues."
"I think the CxAudit tool has room for improvement. At the beginning you can choose a scan of a project, but in any event the project must be scanned again (wasting time)."
"The solution sometimes reports a false auditable code or false positive."
"I would like the product to include more debugging and developed tools. It needs to also add enhancements on the coding side."
"It is an expensive solution."
"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 cost per user is high and should be reduced."
"The lack of ability to review compiled source code. It would then be able to compete with other scanning tools, such as Veracode."
"Xygeni can be more automated."
"Xygeni could be improved if on-premise options were available starting from the starter packages, not only the enterprise models."
"There should be more configuration options that make it easier to target the issues that are more important in your organization's context."
"Xygeni was highly effective for us, but there are areas where improvements could be made."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It is a good product but a little overpriced."
"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."
"Checkmarx is comparatively costlier than other products, which is why some of the customers feel reluctant to go for it, though performance-wise, Checkmarx can compete with other products."
"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."
"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."
"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."
"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
6%
Comms Service Provider
24%
Security Firm
12%
Construction Company
11%
Retailer
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
I am not fully aware of the pricing and licensing of Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. The pricing is also based on...
What needs improvement with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
In my opinion, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks could be improved or enhanced in various ways. I don't have an idea...
What is your primary use case for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
The usual use cases for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks that I have been working with mostly are as simple as dete...
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 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 needs improvement with Checkmarx?
One way Checkmarx One could be improved is if it could automatically run scans every month after implementation. If i...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Xygeni?
The pricing is reasonable. Xygeni provided me with the pricing list that is already public on the web, so it is very ...
What needs improvement with Xygeni?
Xygeni can be more automated. The team is currently working on auto-remediation pipelines, which could be really help...
What is your primary use case for Xygeni?
I use Xygeni to perform SAST and SCA analysis, and to gain better understanding of how my deployment pipelines are co...
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
BKool, Onum, Napptive, Fintonic, Adaion, Metricool, Arexdata, ...
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Xygeni and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.