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
22nd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
70
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (8th)
FortiDevSec
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
24th
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
35th
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 March 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 11.0%, down from 13.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of FortiDevSec is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

ScottDenton - PeerSpot reviewer
Supports different languages, has excellent support, and easily expands
The interactive application security testing, or IAST, where code scans are being ran on an application that lives in a runtime environment on a server or virtual machine, needs improvement. There was limited support from different languages. It didn't support everything under the sun, so you would lose revenue since you didn't have support for Scala or some other language that your developer was fluent in. They needed to improve on language support. That is about it, really. The dev team did everything that they said they were going to do. If they said they were going to hit a mark, they'd hit a mark. That release would come out. Typically, they would do four major releases a year, quarterly, with two-point releases in between, or based on any additional hotfixes that may be needed. In most cases, however, IAST was the part of the product that needed to be improved the most. Codebashing is a really cool product from the aspect of teaching developers how to write secure code. However, it would be even cooler if you could not only point out and teach someone how to do it while also making the appropriate recommendation on how to rewrite the code itself, using machine learning or AI. Instead of you, the developer learning how to do it and then writing the code yourself, it'd be cooler if you could push a button, have it analyzed, scans the code, find the code, find the issue within the line of code, and then go ahead and automatically rewrite that code for you. Then, by repetition, it just teaches you through muscle memory how to do that as opposed to, "Hey, you've found this problem. This is where the problem's located, within this particular line of code." Right now, do you know how to rewrite Java? Well, if you're not familiar with how to do that, then go push on this button. Now, take this test and go through this exercise.” It doesn't make a recommendation. It's not like providing a script that fixes the problem. It's just teaching you on how to write the code in that form in that manner.
Mohammed Jaffir - PeerSpot reviewer
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

"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."
"The only thing I like is that Checkmarx does not need to compile."
"It has all the features we need."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are difficult to pinpoint because of the way the functionalities and the features are intertwined, it's difficult to say which part of them I prefer most. You initiate the scan, you have a scan, you have the review set, and reporting, they all work together as one whole process. It's not like accounting software, where you have the different features, et cetera."
"We use the solution for dynamic application testing."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the Best Fix Location and the Payments option because you can save a lot of time trying to mitigate the configuration. Using these tools can save you a lot of time."
"The solution improved the efficiency of our code security reviews. It helps tremendously because it finds hundreds of potential problems sometimes."
"The SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."
"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

"I would like to see the tool’s pricing improved."
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"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)."
"I really would like to integrate it as a service along with the SAP HANA Cloud Platform. It will then be easy to use it directly as a service."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"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."
"We can run only one project at a time."
"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."
"The only drawback I see with FortiDevSec is the lack of extensions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's relatively expensive."
"It is an expensive solution."
"Most of my customers opted for a perpetual license. They prefer to pay the highest amount up front for the perpetual license and then pay for additional support annually."
"The price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is expensive."
"It is a good product but a little overpriced."
"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."
"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
841,004 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
5%
Computer Software Company
15%
Construction Company
12%
Insurance Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
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?
The pricing is relatively expensive due to the product's quality and performance, but it is worth it.
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 Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: February 2025.
841,004 professionals have used our research since 2012.