We performed a comparison between Checkmarx and Micro Focus Fortify on Demand based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The two solutions are very comparable. All categories received similar ratings except that Checkmarx got better rewviews on deployment and support.
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"The SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."
"What I like best about Checkmarx is that it has fewer false positives than other products, giving you better results."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the SCA module and the code-checking module. Additionally, the solutions are explanatory and helpful."
"Apart from software scanning, software composition scanning is valuable."
"It can integrate very well with DAST solutions. So both of them are combined into an integrated solution for customers running application security."
"The main thing we find valuable about Checkmarx is the ease of use. It's easy to initiate scans and triage defects."
"Checkmarx has helped us deliver more secure products. We are able to do static code analysis with the tool before shipping our code to production. When the integration is in the pipeline, this tool gives us early notifications on code fixes."
"Each bank may have its own core banking applications with proprietary support for different programming languages. This makes Fortify particularly relevant and advantageous in those cases."
"The features that I have found most valuable include its security scan, the vulnerability finds, and the web interface to search and review the issues."
"The user interface is good."
"We have the option to test applications with or without credentials."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"The most valuable features are the detailed reporting and the ability to set up deep scanning of the software, both of which are in the same place."
"Provides good depth of scanning and we get good results."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand is the information it can provide. There is quite a lot of information. It can pinpoint right down to where the problem is, allowing you to know where to fix it. Overall the features are easy to use, you don't have to be a coder. You can be a manager, or in IT operations, et cetera, anyone can use it. It is quite a well-rounded functional solution."
"Checkmarx could improve the REST APIs by including automation."
"Checkmarx needs to be more scalable for large enterprise companies."
"The plugins for the development environment have room for improvements such as for Android Studio and X code."
"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."
"Checkmarx could improve the speed of the scans."
"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."
"We would like to be able to run scans from our local system, rather than having to always connect to the product server, which is a longer process."
"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."
"The products must provide better integration with build tools."
"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."
"Fortify on Demand could be improved with support in Russia."
"The UI could be better. Fortify should also suggest new packages in the product that can be upgraded. Currently, it shows that, but it's not visible enough. In future versions, I would like more insights about the types of vulnerabilities and the pages associated with the exact CVE."
"We have some stability issues, but they are minimal."
"Not fully integrated with CIT processes."
"I would like the solution to add AI support."
"Takes up a lot of resources which can slow things down."
Checkmarx is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 23 reviews while Fortify on Demand is ranked 10th in Application Security Tools with 18 reviews. Checkmarx is rated 7.6, while Fortify on Demand is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Checkmarx writes "Supports different languages, has excellent support, and easily expands". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortify on Demand writes "Seamless integration with various platforms and products, providing a centralized and comprehensive security analysis solutionand". Checkmarx is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Snyk, Coverity and Mend.io, whereas Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify WebInspect, Coverity and OWASP Zap. See our Checkmarx vs. Fortify on Demand report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.