Checkmarx SAST vs Contrast Security Assess comparison

Checkmarx and Contrast Security are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Checkmarx is ranked #22 with an average rating of 9.0, while Contrast Security is ranked #28 with an average rating of 8.0. Checkmarx holds a 1.0% mindshare in SAST, compared to Contrast Security’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Contrast Security users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx SAST

Read 2 Checkmarx SAST reviews

563 Views
98 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Read 11 Contrast Security Assess reviews

762 Views
99 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Checkmarx SAST

Contrast Security Assess

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Checkmarx SAST and Contrast Security Assess based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx SAST vs. Contrast Security Assess Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx SAST vs. Contrast Security Assess

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 859,129 peers since 2012

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 SAST

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

22nd

Average Rating

9.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Contrast Security Assess

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

28th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (30th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx SAST is 1.0%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Cuneyt KALPAKOGLU Phd.

Founder & Chairman at Endpoint-labs Cyber Security R&D

Identifying code vulnerabilities swiftly with no need to complete the coding and offers good security

The primary use case of Checkmarx SAST is application security, specifically static application security testing. It is essential and the root of this concept I did not find measurable information about the financial benefits or return on investment. The most important competitive advantage and…

Read full review

ToddMcAlister

Lead Application and Data Security Engineer at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees

It has an excellent API interface to pull APIs.

Assess has brought our development time down because it helps create code the first time. Instead of going through the Jenkins process to build an application, they can see right off the bat that if there are errors in the code and fix them before it even goes to build.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most important feature is that Checkmarx protects our company against attacks."

"The most important competitive advantage and benefit is the ability to identify vulnerabilities in the source code immediately without needing to complete the coding."

"The most important feature is that Checkmarx protects our company against attacks."

"The most valuable feature is the continuous monitoring aspect: the fact that we don't have to wait for scans to complete for the tool to identify vulnerabilities. They're automatically identified through developers' business-as-usual processes."

"We use the Contrast OSS feature that allows us to look at third-party, open-source software libraries, because it has a cool interface where you can look at all the different libraries. It has some really cool additional features where it gives us how many instances in which something has been used... It tells us it has been used 10 times out of 20 workloads, for example. Then we know for sure that OSS is being used."

"I am impressed with the product's identification of alerts and vulnerabilities."

"This has changed the way that developers are looking at usage of third-party libraries, upfront. It's changing our model of development and our culture of development to ensure that there is more thought being put into the usage of third-party libraries."

"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."

"When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities."

"By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."

"No other tool does the runtime scanning like Contrast does. Other static analysis tools do static scanning, but Contrast is runtime analysis, when the routes are exercised. That's when the scan happens. This is a tool that has a very unique capability compared to other tools. That's what I like most about Contrast, that it's runtime."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

Cons

"We had some issues where Checkmarx did not recognize a vulnerability. We had to talk with the vendor, and they had to include an improvement in the tool to resolve this issue."

"The on-premises version is more expensive compared to the cloud version."

"We had some issues where Checkmarx did not recognize a vulnerability."

"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

"I think there was activity underway to support the centralized configuration control. There are ways to do it, but I think they were productizing more of that."

"Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side."

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."

"The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities."

"The product's retesting part needs improvement. The tool also needs improvement in the suggestions provided for fixing vulnerabilities. It relies more on documentation rather than on quick fixes."

"The out-of-the-box reporting could be improved. We need to write our own APIs to make the reporting more robust."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"The solution is expensive."

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

22%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Computer Software Company

10%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Checkmarx SAST?

We were users in a small country, and we paid one consolidated bill for all the tools, so I don't know the specific amount for Checkmarx.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Checkmarx SAST?

We had some issues where Checkmarx did not recognize a vulnerability. We had to talk with the vendor, and they had to include an improvement in the tool to resolve this issue.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Checkmarx SAST?

We integrated Checkmarx with our pipelines in Jenkins. We had it fully automated for static security scanning to protect our company against attacks.

See all answers

What do you like most about Contrast Security Assess?

When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Contrast Security Assess?

Technical support for the solution should be faster. We have to further analyze what kind of CVEs are in the reported libraries and what part of the code is affected. That analysis can be added to ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Contrast Security Assess?

Contrast Security Assess is deployed on-cloud in our organization. I would recommend Contrast Security Assess to other users. It's a really good tool. It provides lots of details on web-based vulne...

See all answers

Comparisons

Checkmarx One vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 76% of the time

Semgrep vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 6% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 5% of the time

GitLab vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 5% of the time

GitHub Code Scanning vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 4% of the time

More Checkmarx SAST Competitors

Seeker vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 14% of the time

Veracode vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 9% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 9% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 8% of the time

Mend.io vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 8% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

June 2025

Download Checkmarx SAST product report

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

June 2025

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Also Known As

SAST

Contrast Assess

Overview

Checkmarx SAST provides advanced static application security testing by identifying vulnerabilities in source code. It's ideal for ISOs, security professionals, and developers striving to secure applications during development.

Checkmarx SAST is known for its powerful code scanning capabilities that integrate seamlessly into existing development environments. It supports a wide range of programming languages, which makes it applicable for diverse development projects. Some users suggest improvements in the scan performance speed and enhanced support in handling false positives to further optimize workflow efficiency.

What are the standout features of Checkmarx SAST?

Language Support: Offers broad language support catering to multiple coding frameworks.
Integration Flexibility: Seamlessly integrates with existing CI/CD pipelines and developer tools.
Comprehensive Scanning: Detects security vulnerabilities early in the development process.
Detailed Reporting: Provides comprehensive reports that help prioritize remediation efforts.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Improved Security Posture: Enhances application security by catching vulnerabilities early.
Cost Efficiency: Reduces costs associated with post-deployment issue resolution.
Developer Empowerment: Allows developers to identify and fix issues independently.
Regulatory Compliance: Assists in meeting compliance requirements efficiently.

Implemented across various industries, Checkmarx SAST supports sectors like finance, healthcare, and technology with their stringent security requirements. By integrating seamlessly into existing workflows, it ensures that applications remain secure while not disrupting industry-specific processes.

Checkmarx

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Contrast Security

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx SAST vs. Contrast Security Assess

June 2025

Free Report: Checkmarx SAST vs. Contrast Security Assess

Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx SAST vs. Contrast Security Assess and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx SAST vs. Contrast Security Assess report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.