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

Checkmarx One vs CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security 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
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
8
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)
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)
CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Se...
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (10th), Container Security (5th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (6th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (8th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (7th), Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (2nd)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1980216 - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Development Manager For Palo Alto Networks at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Unified security platform has simplified multi-cloud protection and improved threat response
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. Additionally, there is not a clear MSP model compared to other vendors such as CrowdStrike. These are significant limitations, especially today when managed services are becoming increasingly important for end users. Palo Alto decided to limit some functionalities because they want to stress more on Cortex XSIAM. I do not agree with this strategy because Cortex XSIAM is a completely different market compared to Cortex XDR. This is the main issue of Cortex—the commercial model Palo Alto is implementing. The product is very good; the problem is the commercial model. There are probably some areas for improvement because Palo Alto is growing too much. Today the challenge is to have skilled people, which I believe is the same issue everywhere. I do not agree with this decision.
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.
Manish Indupuri - PeerSpot reviewer
senior DevOps engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Provides centralized visibility and real-time threat detection across multiple cloud accounts
Regarding how CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security can be improved, I would say they can improve their support. There were a couple of cases where we needed to escalate issues in order to get proper support. That part could use some tweaking on their end. Additionally, the recent incident during the last summer literally impacted our systems. We had some of our workloads that affected the business, and it was a difficult experience. Apart from that, it is a good tool and the experience with CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security has been excellent. We did not find any kind of issues, but if they could improve their response to security-related incidents and provide on-time support or better understand our concerns and address them accordingly, it could be very helpful. Regarding needed improvements, I think they should enhance automatic alerting with CI/CD scanning and reporting capabilities. Additionally, it would be better to implement Falcon sensor health monitoring so agents are always active. We could know how it is behaving and how it is treating our environment. That could be a little helpful.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Overall, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a technically strong product, and I rate it ten out of ten."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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 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."
"I have seen a return on investment from Checkmarx One."
"By using the automated testing in Checkmarx One, we have saved around one or two days in a full week of our team because we have a lot of code to do with seven markets."
"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."
"The solution has good performance, it is able to compute in 10 to 15 minutes."
"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the SCA module and the code-checking module. Additionally, the solutions are explanatory and helpful."
"Overall, I use Checkmarx One as a strategic control point to improve developer velocity while strengthening application security across the full software lifecycle."
"It gives the proper code flow of vulnerabilities and the number of occurrences."
"Cloud security is one valuable feature. Spotlight is the other one. There is also vulnerability management and a couple of more features."
"It's easy to gather insights and conduct analysis about existing threats."
"The most valuable feature of CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is its lightweight sensor, taking minimal space and not impacting server performance."
"The threat detection capability of CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security has always been the major seller, and it works effectively."
"There is a lot that it can do, but endpoint protection is the main thing about it. The fact that it uses machine learning and artificial intelligence to monitor and remediate the issues in real-time is probably the bread and butter of the product."
"The solution has login features like multi factor authentication."
"CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is user-friendly."
"The most valuable features are the real-time response, which allows me to log into a machine to pull files and check signatures for malicious activities, and the ability to restrict USB block storage usage on endpoints by policy."
 

Cons

"The pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"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."
"I would like to see the DAST solution in the future."
"Checkmarx One can be improved by reducing noise and improving false positive filtering."
"We have received some feedback from our customers who are receiving a large number of false positives."
"It takes around 30 to 40 minutes for checking a build. If you can make it within five minutes or 10 minutes, that would be great."
"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)."
"Some of the descriptions were found to be missing or were not as elaborate as compared to other descriptions. Although, they could be found across various standard sources but it would save a lot of time for developers, if this was fixed."
"The recent incident during the last summer literally impacted our systems; we had some of our workloads that affected the business, and it was a difficult experience."
"There were some integration issues with this product."
"The recent incident during the last summer literally impacted our systems. We had some of our workloads that affected the business, and it was a difficult experience."
"I think the UI could be improved, but the technical support said CrowdStrike will improve the UI in the near future. But right now, it’s so messy."
"The CrowdStrike dashboard currently lacks a username field."
"The improvements needed for CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security include reducing its high cost, which is currently quite expensive, and enhancing the executive reports that are user-friendly for technical engineers but require improvement for higher management."
"The threat intelligence and user behavioral analysis could be more comprehensive."
"I would not say the tool's integration capabilities were straightforward because the complexity depends on the volume of the data."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The number of users and coverage for languages will have an impact on the cost of the license."
"It is an expensive solution."
"We have purchased an annual license to use this solution. The price is reasonable."
"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."
"​Checkmarx is not a cheap scanning tool, but none of the security tools are cheap. Checkmarx is a powerful scanning tool, and it’s essential to have one of these products."
"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."
"I would rate the solution’s pricing an eight out of ten. The tool’s pricing is higher than others and it is for the license alone."
"CrowdStrike Falcon is very expensive."
"CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is pricy."
"CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is very expensive for us. Last month, we had a big issue that took much time and money to resolve. It slowed down our business and required our management team to get involved. We had a problem similar to the "Blue Screen of Death" issue many US companies faced. This incident used up many of our IT resources in just a few months. That's why we're looking for a replacement tool now."
"It's an expensive product"
"Its price is moderate."
"The pricing is reasonable, neither overly expensive nor excessively cheap, making it competitive compared to other market options."
"The pricing is fair for what you get. I'd rate them a solid nine out of ten in terms of pricing."
"It is expensive, but it adds value."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
882,160 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Performing Arts
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise15
 

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...
What do you like most about CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security?
It's easy to gather insights and conduct analysis about existing threats.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security?
It's an expensive product. The solution costs around $60 for a single user on a yearly basis. I would rate the pricin...
What needs improvement with CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security?
I am not part of the current monitoring team, so I do not know how they feel about the tool. I am sharing information...
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
CrowdStrike Falcon ASPM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
882,160 professionals have used our research since 2012.