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

Apiiro vs Checkmarx One comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (28th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (13th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (18th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (13th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (12th), Software Supply Chain Security (8th), Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (7th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (5th)
Apiiro
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (24th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (15th), API Security (15th), Software Supply Chain Security (9th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (17th)
Checkmarx One
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (17th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (7th), AI Security (2nd)
 

Featured Reviews

AP
Assistant Security Architect at Cloudnomics
Automated investigations have cut incident response time and now improve compliance monitoring
As per my experience with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, the UI could be simpler. There are few features which are very hidden, such as those in software bill of materials and compliance policies. Palo Alto Networks could make the UI a bit easier to navigate. Apart from this, all other things are good. Detection and response features are good, and the visibility, especially in the CI/CD pipeline, is also very good. Infrastructure as Code visibility is good. I don't think there is much scope of improvement regarding detection and response. However, they can improve operational efficiency and the UI. I feel that some features which are hidden could be shown on the home page or front page, which would make a significant difference.
Kunal M - PeerSpot reviewer
Capability Center Leader, ETRM Platforms at Shell
Comprehensive risk analysis helps identify key performance trends but report access needs improvement
My first feedback for Apiiro is that it is very slow, extremely slow. The moment I select from the entire list of repositories in my vertical, which is almost more than 400 repositories, it takes a lot of time for me to load the report. Sometimes it fails. I do not have Role-Based Access Control (RBAC). It's only given to the application security team, and Apiiro as a vendor does not have the rollback access control enabled for the clients, so that would have given me access to the reports tab, which would have made my life easier. Currently, I have to go to the risks tab to pull out all this information. I started exploring dashboards with Copilot. I need to reach out to the Apiiro teams to see if I can get an access token so that I can pull out a Power BI dashboard. I think Apiiro definitely has its own capabilities, but if there are access tokens that teams can use to build a custom dashboard, that would be great. This might already exist, but that is something which will ease the vulnerability management day-to-day activities.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most beneficial aspect of Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Palo Alto in general is that there is a single platform for all cloud providers for securitization."
"Overall, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a technically strong product, and I rate it ten out of ten."
"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 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."
"The most valuable features I have found in Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks are those that we provided to customers in a stock environment, as we have done some POCs and tried to check how it can help different organizations, and this same solution has been positioned for multiple customers."
"From a technical standpoint or pricing, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a stronger solution in the market at the moment compared to other products from ConnectWise or Symantec."
"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."
"Previously with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, I deployed this product for one of my customers, and after three to four months, they said that previously they had around four hours of MTTR, and now it has reduced to just 15 to 20 minutes."
"Apiiro's secrets detection feature has saved us several times, which we appreciate greatly."
"The positive impact I have seen from working with Apiiro for my company includes the metrics that we get from Apiiro, which have been extremely helpful."
"The workflow automation is likely the best aspect of the solution."
"The main advantage of this solution is its centralized reporting functionality, which lets us track issues, then see and report on the priorities via a web portal."
"The identification of verification-related security vulnerabilities is really important and one of the key things. It also identifies vulnerabilities for any kind of third-party tool coming into the system or any third-party tools that you are using, which is very useful for avoiding random hacking."
"Checkmarx One has positively impacted our organization as we tend to find vulnerabilities very early in the development cycle."
"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"The report function is the solution's greatest asset."
"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."
"The user interface is modern and nice to use."
"The most valuable features are the easy to understand interface, and it 's very user-friendly."
 

Cons

"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."
"From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market."
"In my opinion, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks can be improved by addressing forensic information collection and storage, although I cannot suggest specific things right now, based on what customers might need."
"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."
"As per my experience with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, the UI could be simpler."
"The negative aspects or areas for improvement in the product include the fact that the cost might be a bit high, which challenges commercials, but not technically."
"The pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions."
"User management is a little bit clunky."
"I would like support for our self-hosted Git server, other than GitHub, just regular Git."
"Updating and debugging of queries is not very convenient."
"Checkmarx being Windows only is a hindrance. Another problem is: why can't I choose PostgreSQL?"
"Checkmarx could improve the REST APIs by including automation."
"When we first ran it on a big project, there wasn't enough memory on the computer. It originally ran with eight gigabytes, and now it runs with 32. The software stopped at some point, and while I don't think it said it ran out of memory, it just said "stopped" and something else. We had to go to the logs and send them to the integrator, and eventually, they found a memory issue in the logs and recommended increasing the memory. We doubled it once, and it didn't seem enough. We doubled it again, and it helped."
"Meta data is always needed."
"Checkmarx is not good because it has too many false positive issues."
"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
"It provides us with quite a handful of false positive issues. If Checkmarx could reduce this number, it would be a great tool to use."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
Information not available
"We have purchased an annual license to use this solution. The price is reasonable."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"The tool's pricing is fine."
"The price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is expensive."
"It's relatively expensive."
"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
"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."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) solutions are best for your needs.
882,961 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
9%
Performing Arts
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
 

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?
From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoint...
What is your primary use case for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
I use Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks to secure cloud infrastructure during cloud transformation. For example, whe...
What needs improvement with Apiiro?
My first feedback for Apiiro is that it is very slow, extremely slow. The moment I select from the entire list of rep...
What is your primary use case for Apiiro?
My only use case is the reporting, which is correct. My role is limited because this is an additional role that I do ...
What advice do you have for others considering Apiiro?
I haven't explored Apiiro's advanced risk analysis features. I have not used the compliance monitoring feature of Api...
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...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Apiiro Control Plane (ASOC), Apiiro API Security (SAST), Apiiro Open Source (SCA)
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Morgan Stanley, Rakuten, Jack Henry, SoFi, Colgate, Navan
YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Find out what your peers are saying about Apiiro vs. Checkmarx One and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
882,961 professionals have used our research since 2012.