Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Checkmarx One vs Veracode comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 2025

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)
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (38th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (17th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (23rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (16th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (14th), Software Supply Chain Security (14th), Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (7th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (9th)
Checkmarx One
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
80
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (16th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (8th), AI Security (1st)
Veracode
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Container Security (8th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (3rd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st)
 

Q&A Highlights

it_user1354977 - PeerSpot reviewer
Works at Securities America
Jul 08, 2020
 

Featured Reviews

Nuno-Santos - PeerSpot reviewer
Cybersecurity Analyst at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Has improved real-time threat detection and unified cloud protection through AI and automation
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is creating some confusion in terms of names because this is recent. They changed the names of the products and are now clarifying their offer. The family of the products is not easy to follow because it's very recent. Regarding the generative AI security tool, I know for sure it's Agentic. Based on my experience with Palo Alto, I can suggest what Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks could make better or what additional functions could be added. This is the best tool in the market. It's not the time to tell what they could do better because it's a recent tool. The market is now adopting it. Our experience doesn't show that they need to do more.
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.
reviewer2703864 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Security Architecture at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Onboarding developers successfully while improving code security through IDE integration
Regarding room for improvement, we have some problems when onboarding new projects because the build process has to be done in a certain way, as Veracode analyzes the binaries and not the code by itself alone. If the process is not configured correctly, it doesn't work. That's one of the things that we are discussing with Veracode. Something positive that we've been able to do is submit formal feature requests to them, and they are working on them; they've already solved some of them. This encourages us to propose new ideas and improvements. Another improvement that we asked for this use case is to be able to configure how Veracode Fix proposes and fixes because sometimes it makes proposals using libraries that go against our architecture design made by the enterprise architecture team. For example, we want them to propose using another library, and that's something we already asked Veracode, and they are working on it. We want to specify when you see this kind of vulnerability, you can only propose these two options.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Overall, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a technically strong product, and I rate it ten out of ten."
"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."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks has impacted our organization positively by keeping our machines secure and our team using the dashboard to find issues quickly."
"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 main benefit to using this solution is that we find vulnerabilities in our software before the development cycle is complete."
"The solution is scalable, but other solutions are better."
"The SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."
"The UI is very intuitive and simple to use."
"The most valuable feature is the simple user interface."
"The product's most valuable feature is static code and supply chain effect analysis. It provides a lot of visibility."
"The best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."
"Scan reviews can occur during the development lifecycle."
"The article scanning is excellent."
"The dynamic scanning tool is what I like the best. Compared to other tools that I've used for dynamic scanning, it's much faster and easier to use."
"The centralized view of different testing types helps reduce our risk exposure. The development teams have the freedom to choose their own libraries and languages. What happens is sometimes developers feel like a particular library is okay to use, then they will start using it, developing some functionality around it. However, as per our mandate, for every new repository that gets added and scanned, a report gets published. Based on that report, we decide if we can continue. In the past, we have found, by mistake, some developers have used copyleft licenses, which are a bit risky to use. We immediately replace these with more permissive, open-source licenses, so we are safe in the end."
"The most valuable feature of Veracode is the binary scan feature for auditing, which allows us to audit the software without the source code."
"Static scanning and software composition analysis are very helpful. I and my colleagues don't need to be an expert on all of those ancillary things, so we can focus more on the business deliverables."
"The most valuable feature is the dynamic application security testing."
"When those scans kick, Veracode integrates back into our JIRA and actually open tickets with the appropriate development teams. We can use that as a measurement of vulnerabilities opened, closed; we can tie them to releases. So, we get a whole lot more statistical information about security in our software products."
"Veracode provides faster scans compared to other static analysis security testing tools."
 

Cons

"Some aspects of the GUI can be confusing and make it difficult for me to find certain options or navigate where needed."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is creating some confusion in terms of names because this is recent."
"The pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions."
"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."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"Integration into the SDLC (i.e. support for last version of SonarQube) could be added."
"We can run only one project at a time."
"Micro-services need to be included in the next release."
"Scanning speed optimization is an area where improvements can be made, and we can reduce false positives."
"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)."
"It is an expensive solution."
"You can't use it in the continuous delivery pipeline because the scanning takes too much time."
"Ideally, I would like better reporting that gives me a more concise and accurate description of what my pain points are, and how to get to them."
"It needs to reach the level of Checkmarx's and Fortify Software's capabilities and service levels, or may further loosen the market share."
"It's problematic if you want to integrate it with your pipelines because the documentation is not so well written and it's full of typos. It is not presented in a structured way. It does not say, "If you want to achieve this particular thing, you have to do steps 1, 2, and 3." Instead, it contains bits of information in different parts, and you have to read everything and then understand the big picture."
"When we scan binary, when we perform binary analysis, it could go faster. That has a lot to do with the essence of scanning binary code, it takes a little bit longer. Certain aspects, depending on what type of code it is, take a little long, especially legacy code."
"Sometimes, I get feedback from a developer saying, "They are scanning a Python code, but getting feedback around Java code." While the remediation and guidelines are there, improvement is still required, e.g., you won't get the exact guidelines, but you can get some sort of a high-level insights."
"Veracode Static Analysis could improve the terminology. For example, I do not know what the sandbox scan does. The terminology and the way they have used it are quite confusing. They should have a process of capturing problems that users are having on their end."
"If the dynamic scan is improved, then the speed might go up. That is somehow not happening. We have raised this concern. It might also help if they could time limit scans to 24 hours instead of letting them go for three days. Then, whatever results could be shared, even if the scan is not complete, that would definitely help us."
"From what we have seen of Veracode's SCA offering, it is just average."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It is the right price for quality delivery."
"We have purchased an annual license to use this solution. The price is reasonable."
"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."
"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."
"The pricing is competitive and provides a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) for achieving application security."
"We got a special offer for a 30% reduction for three years, after our first year. I think for a real source-code scanning tool, you have to add a lot of money for Open Source Analysis, and AppSec Coach (160 Euro per user per year)."
"Its price is fair. It is in or around the right spot. Ultimately, if the price is wrong, customers won't commit, but they do tend to commit. It is neither too cheap nor too expensive."
"We pay based on the number of developers working on a particular project."
"It's too expensive for the European market. That is why, in a big bank with 400 applications, we are able to use it only for 10 of them. But the other solutions are also expensive, so it wasn't a differentiator."
"The cost of Veracode is high."
"Aside from the standard licensing fees, we also have to pay for a competent Success Manager."
"The pricing for Veracode is high, making it difficult for beginners to afford."
"The pricing is pretty high."
"Veracode is expensive. But the solution is worth it."
"It has good, fair licensing. If the price could depend on the scope of its scanning or the languages supported, then that would be better."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

it_user1354977 - PeerSpot reviewer
Works at Securities America
Jul 8, 2020
Jul 8, 2020
My opinions are my own and do not represent any other entities that I may be or have been affiliated with. On this topic I think it is important to acknowledge that no matter which solution you go for you will have false positives. I don't think there will be any solution that properly solves this anytime soon. As for Checkmarx vs SonarQube... Checkmarx may cover more rules over a wider land...
2 out of 3 answers
DG
Head of Software Delivery at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Jul 6, 2020
My opinions are my own and do not represent any other entities that I may be or have been affiliated with.  On this topic I think it is important to acknowledge that no matter which solution you go for you will have false positives. I don't think there will be any solution that properly solves this anytime soon.  As for Checkmarx vs SonarQube...  Checkmarx may cover more rules over a wider landscape, however I personally found this extra breadth covered outlyer rules and mostly lower priority issues. Both Checkmarx and SonarQube cover the OWASP top 10 and Sans25. Both tools can be tuned to help reduce false positives, for both you will need to analyse your tuning to ensure you are not introducing false negatives. Any tools that provide you customisation come with the risk that you could make things worse.  SonarQube has very good integration into most development IDEs empowering the engineers to run scans against the company rules on their local machine before submitting your source control and further tooling. In some it will even check the code automatically while you type it.  I see you also included Veracode in here. In my opinion that is a far superior tool to Checkmarx, this is down to their more modern approach to this problem. They also allow local developer integration to self lint code before submission.  In a perfect world, I would use Sonar for development bugs, test coverage and technical debt measurements. Then veracode to handle the SAST side for me. In short I would not duplicate the security scans in Sonar and Veracode.  Hope that helps
DG
Factory Head, Web (Digital), Social, Mobile Enterprise COE at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees
Jul 7, 2020
SonarQube can be used for SAST. However, based on our internal analysis, our team feel CheckMarx is better suited for Security compared to SonarQube. SoanrQube is used in day to day developer code scan and Checkmarx is used during code movement to staging or during release.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Performing Arts
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise45
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise44
Large Enterprise115
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
The solution is costly, with high-end capabilities suitable for enterprises. It is less affordable for startups or sm...
What needs improvement with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
Regarding areas for improvement, the tool performs its functions well, but frequent name changes across Palo Alto Net...
What is your primary use case for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks serves as our primary tool for understanding our assets and performing API integra...
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 do you like most about Checkmarx?
Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%.
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...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. Son...
What do you like most about Veracode Static Analysis?
I like its integration with GitHub. I like using it from GitHub. I can use the GitHub URL and find out the vulnerabil...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veracode Static Analysis?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Veracode is that it is fairly moderate.
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Manhattan Associates, Azalea Health, Sabre, QAD, Floor & Decor, Prophecy International, SchoolCNXT, Keap, Rekner, Cox Automotive, Automation Anywhere, State of Missouri and others.
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.