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

Checkmarx One vs Invicti comparison

 

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

Checkmarx One
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
3rd
Ranking in API Security
3rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
70
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Vulnerability Management (21st), Static Code Analysis (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (8th)
Invicti
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
15th
Ranking in API Security
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.6%, down from 14.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Invicti is 1.5%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Rohit Kesharwani - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides good security analysis and security identification within the source code
We integrate Checkmarx into our software development cycle using GitLab's CI/CD pipeline. Checkmark has been the most helpful for us in the development stage. The solution's incremental scanning feature has impacted our development speed. The solution's vulnerability detection is around 80% to 90% accurate. I would recommend Checkmarx to other users because it is one of the good tools for doing security analysis and security identification within the source code. Overall, I rate Checkmarx a nine out of ten.
Kunal M - PeerSpot reviewer
Proactive scanning measures and realistic audit recommendations enhance development focus
Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment. This feature helps us focus on priorities and prioritize the development team's effort, integrating seamlessly with DevOps to facilitate proactive scans of environments. Invicti also provides audit recommendations that are quite realistic, making it easy to discuss plans with developers.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It can integrate very well with DAST solutions. So both of them are combined into an integrated solution for customers running application security."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"The solution communicates where to fix the issue for the purpose of less iterations."
"Both automatic and manual code review (CxQL) are valuable."
"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."
"It has all the features we need."
"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 best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."
"I would rate the stability as ten out of ten."
"The platform is stable."
"One of the features I like about this program is the low number of false positives and the support it offers."
"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."
"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."
"The scanner is light on the network and does not impact the network when scans are running."
"This tool is really fast and the information that they provide on vulnerabilities is pretty good."
"I am impressed by the whole technology that they are using in this solution. It is really fast. When using netscan, the confirmation that it gives on the vulnerabilities is pretty cool. It is really easy to configure a scan in Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner. It is also really easy to deploy."
 

Cons

"I would like the product to include more debugging and developed tools. It needs to also add enhancements on the coding side."
"The statistics module has a function that allows you to show some statistics, but I think it's limited. Maybe it needs more information."
"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."
"C, C++, VB and T-SQL are not supported by this product. Although, C and C++ were advertised as being supported."
"Checkmarx could improve the solution reports and false positives. The false positives could be reduced. For example, we have alerts that are tagged as vulnerabilities but when you drill down they are not."
"There is nothing particular that I don't like in this solution. It can have more integrations, but the integrations that we would like are in the roadmap anyway, and they just need to deliver the roadmap. What I like about the roadmap is that it is going where it needs to go. If I were to look at the roadmap, there is nothing that is jumping out there that says to me, "Yeah. I'd like something else on the roadmap." What they're looking to deliver is what I would expect and forecast them to deliver."
"The scannings are not sufficiently updated."
"They don't really provide the proof of concept up to the level that we need in our organization. We are a consultancy firm, and we provide consultancy for the implementation and deployment solutions to our customers. When you run the scans and the scan is completed, it only shows the proof of exploit, which really doesn't work because the tool is running the scan and exploiting on the read-only form. You don't really know whether it is actually giving the proof of exploit. We cannot prove it manually to a customer that the exploit is genuine. It is really hard to perform it manually and prove it to the concerned development, remediation, and security teams. It is currently missing the static application security part of the application security, especially web application security. It would be really cool if they can integrate a SAS tool with their dynamic one."
"The license could be better. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license. It's a major hindrance that we are facing while scanning applications, and we have to be sure that the URLs are the same and not different so that we do not end up consuming another license for it. Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. The licensing is tied to the URL, and it's restricted. If you have a URL that you scanned once, like a website, you cannot retry that same license. If you are scanning the same website but in a different domain or different URL, you might end up paying for a second license. It would also be better if they provided proper support for multi-factor authentications. In the next release, I would like them to include good multi-factor authentication support."
"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."
"It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities."
"The solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved."
"The licensing model should be improved to be more cost-effective. There are URL restrictions that consume our license. Compared to other DAST solutions and task tools like WebInspect and Burp Enterprise, Invicti is very expensive. The solution’s scanning time is also very long compared to other DAST tools. It might be due to proof-based scanning."
"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."
"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."
"It's relatively expensive."
"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
"The license has a vague language around P1 issues and the associated support. Make sure to review these in order to align them with your organizational policies."
"The price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is expensive."
"Invicti is best suited for large enterprises. I don't think small and medium-sized businesses can afford it. Maintenance costs aren't that great."
"It is competitive in the security market."
"Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license."
"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."
"The price should be 20% lower"
"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."
"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."
"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
5%
Educational Organization
48%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?
As a technical user, I do not handle pricing or licensing, but I am aware that Invicti offers flexible licensing models based on organizational needs.
What do you like most about Invicti?
The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan.
What needs improvement with Invicti?
Invicti's reporting capabilities need enhancement. We need enterprise-level information instead of repo-level details. Unlike Appiro, Invicti does not provide portfolio-level insights into vulnerab...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Netsparker
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Invicti and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.