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

Checkmarx SAST vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 SAST
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
21st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (11th), Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx SAST is 2.3%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 3.1%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional3.1%
Checkmarx SAST2.3%
Other94.6%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Tharindu Malwenna - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Application Security Engineer at a newspaper with 5,001-10,000 employees
Has supported early vulnerability detection but requires tuning to reduce false positives and scanning delays
When assessing the accuracy and efficiency of Checkmarx SAST scanning capabilities, they are currently recommending that doing the full scan is the main, correct way of scanning the repositories. However, based on the repository size we have, it sometimes takes more than 10 minutes for larger repositories, which is a downside. The accuracy of the results depends on various factors, as some of the test folders tend to give us false positives, which makes a huge impact on the vulnerabilities. Those are the major things that we have to fine-tune from our end. I would rate Checkmarx SAST around a seven, as it does have some false positives we have to work with, which are the major concerning things. The number of false positives is significant because we cannot implement policies because of this.
MH
Penetration Tester & Information Security Expert at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees
Dedicated browser and repeater have improved my proxy testing and manual vulnerability checks
I'm hoping perhaps for something to make it easier, such as to define things where if a message or a response is such and such, automatically make a request that is such and such. Perhaps something like this because otherwise, nowadays we have to do it manually. Perhaps they can automate it a bit more. Perhaps they could add some automation to things, to see what we do manually, which it has the tools to do manually, and perhaps enable with a click of a button to do things automatically. I'm not too sure which, but I'm sure they can from a product management point of view, do things that we need to do two, three, or four steps manually regarding specific testing. For instance, we want to check something specific if it's this or if it's that. Perhaps to define it once and have it more automatic, perhaps.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This helps us a lot in identifying vulnerabilities in early stages, and the integration within the IDEs helps developers get the results into their IDE itself, making it easier for them to fix vulnerabilities."
"The detailed reports from Checkmarx SAST help with our security process by showing details about which line is actually vulnerable, which is beneficial for the developers, and I do not have any suggestions or inputs on that area."
"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 CX1 is a unified platform that covers all components such as SAST, SCA, DAST, container scanning, and infrastructure code, which is quite beneficial because some clients need one-stop solutions for all their needs."
"The most important feature is that Checkmarx protects our company against attacks."
"It is useful for scanning and tracing activities."
"We found PortSwigger to be the best match for our business."
"Enables automation of different tasks such as authorization testing."
"The crawling capability is excellent."
"Everyone seems very happy with the solution."
"The feature that we have found most valuable is that it comes with pre-set configurations, with a set of predefined options where you can pick one and start scanning, and we also have the option of creating our own configurations, such as how often the applications need to be scanned, along with good reporting and dashboards that integrate well with other task management applications we are using."
"I find the attack model quite amazing, where I can write my scripts and load my scripts as well, which helps quite a bit."
"The suite testing models are very good. It's very secure."
 

Cons

"I believe that nothing in particular could be improved about Checkmarx SAST, only the turnaround time and the fact that technical account managers keep moving around, which leads to some lag in communication."
"The main challenge with Checkmarx SAST is the price. The price is a challenge because Checkmarx SAST is a very big brand, and many mid-sized companies cannot afford it as they are very price-conscious."
"The accuracy of the results depends on various factors, as some of the test folders tend to give us false positives, which makes a huge impact on the vulnerabilities."
"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."
"There is a certain amount of lead time for the tickets to get resolved."
"Mitigating the issues and low confluence issues needs some improvement. Implementing demand with the ChatGPT under the web solution is an additional feature I would like to see in the next release."
"I would like to see a more optimized solution, as it currently uses a lot of CPU power and memory."
"In the Professional version, we cannot link it with the CI/CD process."
"Sometimes the solution can run a little slow."
"If your application uses multi-factor authentication, registration management cannot be automated."
"In general, there's not much to complain about but the stability of the tool is not good enough."
"I need the solution to be more user-friendly. The solution needs to be user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The platform's pricing is reasonable."
"We have one license. The price is very nominal."
"It is expensive for us in Brazil because the currency exchange rate from a dollar to a Brazilian Real is quite steep."
"The cost is approximately $500 for a single license, and there are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fees."
"It is a cheap solution, but it may not be cheaper than other solutions."
"PortSwigger is reasonably-priced. It's fair."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution, which is neither cheap nor expensive."
"The yearly cost is about $300."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise35
 

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.
What needs improvement with Checkmarx SAST?
I believe that nothing in particular could be improved about Checkmarx SAST, only the turnaround time and the fact that technical account managers keep moving around, which leads to some lag in com...
What is your primary use case for Checkmarx SAST?
I manage the application security side of the products here, currently utilizing solutions such as Checkmarx, Akamai, Traceable, and Invicti, which are the security scanning tools that we use. In t...
Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The cost of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is reasonable at approximately $500 per year per user.
What needs improvement with PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
I'm hoping perhaps for something to make it easier, such as to define things where if a message or a response is such and such, automatically make a request that is such and such. Perhaps something...
 

Also Known As

SAST
Burp
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx SAST vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.