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."
"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."
"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 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."
"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 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."
"It is very useful because it fits our requirements. It is also easy to use. It is not complex, and we are satisfied with the results."
"It allows for SAST scanning of uncompiled code. Further, it natively integrates with all key repos formats (Git, TFS, SVN, Perforce, etc)."
"Less false positive errors as compared to any other solution."
"It can integrate very well with DAST solutions. So both of them are combined into an integrated solution for customers running application security."
"Once you implement Checkmarx One, you can be sure that you're getting value from the solution almost immediately because Checkmarx One also handles false positives very effectively, saving you time and saving your developers time."
"Vulnerability details is valuable."
"The administration in Checkmarx is very good."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the auto-detection capability for threat hunting and issuing advisories on remedies."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The initial setup is easy ."
"The most significant benefit is how quickly malware and other malicious attacks are detected."
"The alerts are clearer, and the capabilities are much better than the others."
"I think the overall solution should be rated a ten out of ten."
 

Cons

"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."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is creating some confusion in terms of names because this is recent."
"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."
"The pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions."
"Some aspects of the GUI can be confusing and make it difficult for me to find certain options or navigate where needed."
"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."
"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."
"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"The integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."
"One area for improvement in Checkmarx is pricing, as it's more expensive than other products."
"Meta data is always needed."
"Micro-services need to be included in the next release."
"We have received some feedback from our customers who are receiving a large number of false positives."
"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."
"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."
"The tool's scalability is low."
"Incorporating threat intelligence into the system would be a valuable addition."
"It would be more convenient if there was an easier way to install CrowdStrike, perhaps through better integration with Active Directory."
"The tool could give us more templates so that people who are not updated with the platform can easily get acquainted with how to secure and utilize the product more."
"There is room for improvement in the solution's ability to handle Linux systems."
"The only challenge lies in token verification."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
"Checkmarx is comparatively costlier than other products, which is why some of the customers feel reluctant to go for it, though performance-wise, Checkmarx can compete with other products."
"It is not expensive, but sometimes, their pricing model or licensing model is not very clear. There are similar variables, such as projects or developers, and sometimes, it is a little bit confusing."
"We have a subscription license that is on a yearly basis, and it's a pretty competitive solution."
"It's relatively expensive."
"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."
"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."
"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."
"I am not the one who handled the pricing. A different team worked on it, but it is pretty expensive."
"It's an expensive product"
"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 package but does what it says it will do."
"Its price is moderate."
"The pricing is reasonable, neither overly expensive nor excessively cheap, making it competitive compared to other market options."
"CrowdStrike Falcon is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Performing Arts
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software 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 Business6
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?
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 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: February 2026.
882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.