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

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 (12th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (5th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (9th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (4th), AI Security (3rd)
Kiuwan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
34th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
29th
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 October 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 7.0%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.2%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One7.0%
Kiuwan1.2%
Other91.8%
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

"We were using HPE Security Fortify to scan code for security vulnerabilities, but it can scan only after a successful compile, and if the code has dependencies or build errors the scan fails, while with Checkmarx pre-compile scanning is seamless and allows us to scan more code."
"In summary, this is a good application that you can use to scan every code language."
"Our static operation security has been able to identify more security issues since implementing this solution."
"Checkmarx is probably one of the best static code analyzers available in the market at this point."
"The product's most valuable feature is static code and supply chain effect analysis. It provides a lot of visibility."
"It provides a graphical view of any vulnerabilities."
"We use the solution for dynamic application testing."
"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."
"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."
"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."
"I find it immensely helpful because it's not just about generating code; it's about ensuring efficiency in the execution."
"Lifecycle features, because they permit us to show non-technical people the risk and costs hidden into the code due to bad programming practices."
"​We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."
"We have had an improvement of 20% in our time to market and it significantly improved the quality of our code."
"This solution helps us to catch issues early on, and find problems that we never knew we had."
"Saving time and money by automatically identifying problems is unbelievable."
 

Cons

"Micro-services need to be included in the next release."
"The plugins for the development environment have room for improvements such as for Android Studio and X code."
"Creating and editing custom rules in Checkmarx is difficult because the license for the editor comes at an additional cost, and there is a steep learning curve."
"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."
"As the solution becomes more complex and feature rich, it takes more time to debug and resolve problems. Feature-wise, we have no complaints, but Checkmarx becomes harder to maintain as the product becomes more complex. When I talk to support, it takes them longer to fix the problem than it used to."
"The tool is currently quite static in terms of finding security vulnerabilities. It would be great if it was more dynamic and we had even more tools at our disposal to keep us safe. It would help if there was more scanning or if the process was more automated."
"The pricing can get a bit expensive, depending on the company's size."
"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."
"It could improve its scalability abilities."
"Improvement could be made with the integration of the programming tools."
"The rate of false positives, where it reports issues that are not really issues, can be improved."
"Perhaps more languages supported."
"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."
"For mobile development, we are not too experienced, and it is not the perfect tool because the integration with certain products is very manual."
"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."
"We faced a lot of problems with the initial setup and support gave us difficulties around the installation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."
"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."
"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."
"Before implementing the product I would evaluate if it is really necessary to scan so many different languages and frameworks. If not, I think there must be a cheaper solution for scanning Java-only applications (which are 90% of our applications)."
"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."
"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
"We got a special offer for a 30% reduction for three years, after our first year. I think for a real source-code scanning tool, you have to add a lot of money for Open Source Analysis, and AppSec Coach (160 Euro per user per year)."
"The average deal size was usually anywhere between $120K to $175K on an annual basis, which could be divided across 12 months."
"This solution is cheaper than other tools."
"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."
"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."
"Check with your account manager."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."
"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
918,169 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
7%
 

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: September 2026.
918,169 professionals have used our research since 2012.