We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Invicti based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We use the solution for dynamic application testing."
"Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%."
"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."
"Less false positive errors as compared to any other solution."
"The solution is always updating to continuously add items that create a level of safety from vulnerabilities. It's one of the key features they provide that's an excellent selling point. They're always ahead of the game when it comes to finding any vulnerabilities within the database."
"The only thing I like is that Checkmarx does not need to compile."
"The solution allows us to create custom rules for code checks."
"The main thing we find valuable about Checkmarx is the ease of use. It's easy to initiate scans and triage defects."
"I am impressed by the whole technology that they are using in this solution. It is really fast. When using netscan, the confirmation that it gives on the vulnerabilities is pretty cool. It is really easy to configure a scan in Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner. It is also really easy to deploy."
"Its ability to crawl a web application is quite different than another similar scanner."
"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."
"Invicti's best feature is the ability to identify vulnerabilities and manually verify them."
"The scanner and the result generator are valuable features for us."
"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."
"Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms. This feature expands the attack surface."
"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
"Implementing a blackout time for any user or teams: Needs improvement."
"Licensing models and Swift language support are the aspects in which this product needs to improve. Swift is a new language, in which major customers require support for lower prices."
"They should make it more container-friendly and optimized for the CI pipeline. They should make it a little less heavy. Right now, it requires a SQL database, and the way the tool works is that it has an engine and then it has an analysis database in which it stores the information. So, it is pretty heavy from that perspective because you have to have a full SQL Server. They're working on something called Checkmarx Light, which is a slim-down version. They haven't released it yet, but that's what we need. There should be something a little more slimmed down that can just run the analysis and output the results in a format that's readable as opposed to having a full, really big, and thick deployment with a full database server."
"Meta data is always needed."
"The product's reporting feature could be better. The feature works well for developers, but reports generated to be shared with external parties are poor, it lacks the details one gets when viewing the results directly from the Checkmarx One platform."
"The solution sometimes reports a false auditable code or false positive."
"The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker."
"Maybe the ability to make a good reporting format is needed."
"The custom attack preparation screen might be improved."
"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."
"The solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved."
"The solution needs to make a more specific report."
"Asset scanning could be better. Once, it couldn't scan assets, and the issue was strange. The price doesn't fit the budget of small and medium-sized businesses."
"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times. This needs to be looked into."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while Invicti is ranked 20th in Application Security Tools with 25 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Invicti is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Invicti writes "A customizable security testing solution with good tech support, but the price could be better". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Invicti is most compared with OWASP Zap, Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning and SonarQube. See our Checkmarx One vs. Invicti 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.
