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

Checkmarx One vs FortiDevSec comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Checkmarx One
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
3rd
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
17th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (7th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (2nd)
FortiDevSec
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
22nd
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
47th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.3%, down from 11.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of FortiDevSec is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Checkmarx One10.3%
FortiDevSec0.5%
Other89.2%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
MohammedJaffir - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at Cipheroot
Scans codes in CI/CD pipelines and identifies vulnerabilities
In a customer environment, developers integrate their code with CI/CD pipelines. Most developers use cloud platforms like AWS or Azure and project management tools. FortiDevSec integrates with these CI/CD pipelines using agents such as YAML files. Once integrated, FortiDevSec scans the source code using our product or within the IDE. The most valuable feature is the ability to identify known vulnerabilities in applications by generating reports easily. This development gamification is very useful for developers. Compared to TechSmart and Fortify, FortiDevSec has similar features, but it is much easier to use because of its simple setup. SysTrack, for example, is not very simple. For the CI/CD pipeline, we only need to integrate a YAML file into the security process. Compared to other products, the tool requires fewer steps. We must integrate one file with the CI/CD pipeline, automatically pulling the code report to the repository. Using our API and username, it is easy to scan the environment. The tool's integration is also easy.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Checkmarx One has positively impacted the organization, and since replacing the previous tool, SAST and SCA scans are conducted in a couple of minutes instead of hours or days, saving time and increasing speed to market by reducing the timeline from three or four days to one day only."
"The only thing I like is that Checkmarx does not need to compile."
"The best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."
"The solution allows us to create custom rules for code checks."
"The solution is scalable, but other solutions are better."
"The process of remediating software security vulnerabilities can now be performed (ongoing) as portions of the application are being built in advance of being compiled."
"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."
"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."
"In a customer environment, developers integrate their code with CI/CD pipelines. Most developers use cloud platforms like AWS or Azure and project management tools. FortiDevSec integrates with these CI/CD pipelines using agents such as YAML files. Once integrated, FortiDevSec scans the source code using our product or within the IDE."
 

Cons

"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."
"Checkmarx reports many false positives that we need to manually segregate and mark “Not exploitable”."
"The validation process needs to be sped up."
"With Checkmarx, normally you need to use one tool for quality and you need to use another tool for security. I understand that Checkmarx is not in the parity space because it's totally different, but they could include some free features or recommendations too."
"They can support the remaining languages that are currently not supported. They can also create a different model that can identify zero-day attacks. They can work on different patterns to identify and detect zero-day vulnerability attacks."
"It is an expensive solution."
"Checkmarx needs to be more scalable for large enterprise companies."
"We are trying to find out if there is a way to identify the run-time null values. I am analyzing different tools to check if there is any tool that supports run-time null value identification, but I don't think any of the tools in the market currently supports this feature. It would be helpful if Checkmarx can identify and throw an exception for a null value at the run time. It would make things a lot easier if there is a way for Checkmarx to identify nullable fields or hard-coded values in the code. The accessibility for customized Checkmarx rules is currently limited and should be improved. In addition, it would be great if Checkmarx can do static code and dynamic code validation. It does a lot of security-related scanning, and it should also do static code and dynamic code validation. Currently, for security-related validation, we are using Checkmarx, and for static code and dynamic code validation, we are using some other tools. We are spending money on different tools. We can pay a little extra money and use Checkmarx for everything."
"The only drawback I see with FortiDevSec is the lack of extensions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a good product but a little overpriced."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"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."
"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."
"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."
"We have a subscription license that is on a yearly basis, and it's a pretty competitive solution."
"It is an expensive solution."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
882,744 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

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 well. Veracode is only a cloud solution. Hope this helps.
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 additional applications and users. I advise negotiating multi-year contracts or bundle...
What needs improvement with FortiDevSec?
The only drawback I see with FortiDevSec is the lack of extensions.
What advice do you have for others considering FortiDevSec?
We have implemented FortiDevSec for one customer for a year. It has been implemented successfully, and we haven't received any complaints from them. Since it's been used by only one customer, if we...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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 SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: February 2026.
882,744 professionals have used our research since 2012.