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 (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), 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 September 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 7.3%, down from 10.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.1%, 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 One7.3%
Kiuwan1.1%
Other91.6%
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 most valuable feature is the simple user interface."
"The most valuable feature is that it actually identifies the different criteria you can set to meet whatever standards you're trying to get your system accredited for."
"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 solution communicates where to fix the issue for the purpose of less iterations."
"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."
"Checkmarx One has positively impacted the organization by providing resolution strategies and indicating which vulnerabilities need to be fixed."
"Checkmarx One has positively impacted my organization because in the past, when Checkmarx One scan was not implemented, we faced a lot of issues finding vulnerabilities inside the repository, but now, since we have integrated Checkmarx One into our repository, we can smoothly and very easily find vulnerabilities and manage those effectively."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"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."
"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."
"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."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable in Kiuwan is the speed of scanning. Compared to other SaaS tools I have used, Kiuwan is much quicker in performing scans. I have not yet used it on a large code base, but from what I have experienced, it is efficient and accurate. Additionally, I have used it both manually and in an automated pipeline, and both methods have been effective. The speed of scanning is what makes it valuable to me."
"We have been using this solution for one and a half years."
"I advise using Kiuwan because it's very straightforward and totally easy to understand."
"The solution will measure your development team, give a KPI for the CISO, reduce the time it takes to find and correct coding errors, and more."
"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."
 

Cons

"It needs better role management."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"Checkmarx needs improvement in its Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) and API security features."
"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."
"Updating and debugging of queries is not very convenient."
"The statistics module has a function that allows you to show some statistics, but I think it's limited. Maybe it needs more information."
"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."
"Micro-services need to be included in the next release."
"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."
"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."
"Improvement could be made with the integration of the programming tools."
"The configuration hasn't been that good."
"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."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"The rate of false positives, where it reports issues that are not really issues, can be improved."
"I would like to see additional languages supported."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"The average deal size was usually anywhere between $120K to $175K on an annual basis, which could be divided across 12 months."
"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."
"The tool's pricing is fine."
"It is a good product but a little overpriced."
"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."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."
"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."
"Check with your account manager."
"This solution is cheaper than other tools."
"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."
"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.
911,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Construction Company
12%
University
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
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: August 2026.
911,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.