No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan 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 Application Security Tools
2nd
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (11th), Container Security (13th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (4th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (3rd)
Kiuwan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
33rd
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
28th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 8.0%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.1%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One8.0%
Kiuwan1.1%
Other90.9%
Application Security Tools
 

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.
Mustufa Bhavnagarwala - PeerSpot reviewer
CyberRisk Solution Advisor at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement
Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran the tool and tried to scan the repository to find the security issues. The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The UI is very intuitive and simple to use."
"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"Our static operation security has been able to identify more security issues since implementing this solution."
"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."
"Overall, I use Checkmarx One as a strategic control point to improve developer velocity while strengthening application security across the full software lifecycle."
"The main thing we find valuable about Checkmarx is the ease of use, as it's easy to initiate scans and triage defects."
"Scan reviews can occur during the development lifecycle."
"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."
"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."
"We have been using this solution for one and a half years."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the continuous integration process, which enables us to make the best in terms of security of our solution and not introduce new mistakes, with problems solved step by step."
"Software analytics for a lot of different languages including ABAP."
"I've tried many open source applications and the remediation or correction actions that were provided by Kiuwan were very good in comparison."
"From the tool itself, the developer can run an analysis with the same quality, and with this tool, every developer has the opportunity to do an unlimited analysis."
"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the time to resolution, where it tells you how long it is going to take to get to a zero-base or a five-star security rating."
 

Cons

"It could be improved with more reporting of false positives and the understanding of file references."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"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."
"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."
"The purchase of this solution was a mistake. I would advise others to deploy the solution and to test all of the functionality before buying and do not trust the marketing from Checkmarx."
"The stability of Checkmarx could improve. We're having issues with it, and the scan reliability is sometimes impacted so we sometimes have to restart the services to allow scans out of the queue."
"I would like to see the tool’s pricing improved."
"It is an expensive solution."
"I would like to see better integration with the Visual Studio and Eclipse IDEs."
"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."
"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."
"Kiuwan's support has room for improvement. You can only open a ticket is through email, and the support team is outside of our country. They should have a support number or chat."
"The rate of false positives, where it reports issues that are not really issues, can be improved."
"The QA developer and security could be improved."
"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."
"The configuration hasn't been that good."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."
"We have purchased an annual license to use this solution. The price is reasonable."
"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."
"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."
"The pricing is competitive and provides a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) for achieving application security."
"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."
"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."
"This solution is cheaper than other tools."
"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."
"Check with your account manager."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Construction Company
12%
University
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
 

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 is the biggest difference between Veracode and Checkmarx?
According to my experience of using both the tools in different organizations Veracode is a Cloud-native, managed AppSec platform with strong focus on ease of use, it is SaaS delivery, and provide...
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.