Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan comparison

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

3,250 Views
2,633 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Checkmarx One and Kiuwan are leading contenders in application security testing. Users indicate Checkmarx One holds an advantage in pricing and support satisfaction, while Kiuwan excels in feature offerings, making it appealing for feature-focused users.

Features: Checkmarx One excels in comprehensive security testing, seamless integration capabilities, and delivering detailed code analysis. Kiuwan is noted for providing intricate vulnerability reports, ease of configuration, and facilitating efficient remediation processes.

Room for Improvement: Checkmarx One could enhance performance speed, back-end robustness, and scanning optimization to deliver faster results. Kiuwan's documentation clarity, dashboard usability, and intuitive navigation could be improved for better user experience.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Checkmarx One offers simple deployment options but should focus on quicker support response times. Kiuwan is praised for its smooth deployment and responsive customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Checkmarx One's slightly higher setup costs are justified by its functionality. Kiuwan offers attractive pricing and ROI, due to its efficiency and lower initial costs, appealing to budget-conscious organizations.

To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan Report (Updated: June 2026).

Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan

Download the complete report

Helped 900,196 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in other categories

Vulnerability Management (15th), Container Security (14th), 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 (2nd)

Kiuwan

Ranking in Application Security Tools

29th

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

27th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 8.3%, down from 10.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.2%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Checkmarx One	8.3%
Kiuwan	1.2%
Other	90.5%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Shahzad Shahzad

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.

Read full review

Mustufa Bhavnagarwala

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Checkmarx One has positively impacted the organization by providing resolution strategies and indicating which vulnerabilities need to be fixed."

"In my opinion, Checkmarx gives better results, and its protection is better than SonarQube."

"The setup is very easy. There is a lot of information in the documents which makes the install not difficult at all."

"Initial setup couldn't be any easier; Checkmarx has good documentation on environment requirements, and as long as you meet those, the installation process takes maybe 30 minutes for an initial setup, perhaps a bit longer if you're adding multiple engines."

"The tool's valuable features include integrating GPT and Copilot. Additionally, the UI web representation is very user-friendly, making navigation easy. GPT has made several improvements to my security code."

"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the SCA module and the code-checking module. Additionally, the solutions are explanatory and helpful."

"The UI is user-friendly."

"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."

More Checkmarx One pros

"The solution offers very good technical support."

"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."

"I advise using Kiuwan because it's very straightforward and totally easy to understand."

"For the moment, this is a solution that I could recommend."

"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."

"We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."

"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."

"The solution has a continuous integration process."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"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 integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."

"Checkmarx could improve the speed of the scans."

"It needs better role management."

"There are some downtimes when Checkmarx One is being upgraded to the latest version or some improvement is there."

"The solution's user interface could be improved because it seems outdated."

"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."

"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."

More Checkmarx One cons

"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."

"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."

"It would be beneficial to streamline calls and transitions seamlessly for improved functionality."

"In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further."

"For mobile development, we are not too experienced, and it is not the perfect tool because the integration with certain products is very manual."

"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."

"The configuration hasn't been that good."

"More languages and frameworks would enhance this tool."

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have purchased an annual license to use this solution. The price is reasonable."

"It is a good product but a little overpriced."

"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)."

"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."

"It's relatively expensive."

"The number of users and coverage for languages will have an impact on the cost of the license."

"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."

More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice

"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."

"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."

"Check with your account manager."

"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."

"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

900,196 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

University

11%

Construction Company

11%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	32
Midsize Enterprise	9
Large Enterprise	46

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	16
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	6

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

SonarQube vs Checkmarx One

Compared 32% of the time

Veracode vs Checkmarx One

Compared 3% of the time

Checkmarx SAST vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

Fortify Software Security Center vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

More Checkmarx One Competitors

SonarQube vs Kiuwan

Compared 19% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 13% of the time

GitHub vs Kiuwan

Compared 7% of the time

Snyk vs Kiuwan

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Kiuwan

Compared 4% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Checkmarx One

Download Checkmarx One product report

Download Kiuwan product report

Overview

Checkmarx One delivers robust security through seamless integration with SCM and CI/CD tools, ensuring reliable SAST and SCA. Primarily used by organizations for vulnerability detection, it supports cloud and on-premises deployment to enhance secure coding practices.

Checkmarx One provides organizations with comprehensive tools for secure software development, integrating effectively with CI/CD pipelines to scan thousands of applications. Its capabilities extend to identifying vulnerabilities in both code bases and third-party software. Enhancing workflow by supporting SCM solutions, it assists in maintaining secure coding standards and compliance. While excelling in various areas, it requires improvements in scan speed, reduction of false positives, and broader platform integration, particularly for COBOL and Swift. Its pricing model is noted as high, and demand exists for better tutorials and documentation.

What are the key features of Checkmarx One?

Comprehensive Integration: Seamlessly connects with SCM, CI/CD tools to streamline security workflows.
Accurate SAST and SCA: Precisely identifies vulnerabilities down to the exact line of code.
Custom Rules Configuration: Allows tailored security measures to match specific needs.
Quick Scanning: Provides fast analysis to speed up the development process.
Automated Code Remediation: Helps in efficiently fixing code vulnerabilities.

What benefits should users expect in reviews?

Improved Security: Enhances code safety, reducing vulnerabilities efficiently.
Effective False Positivity Management: Optimizes time spent on genuine issues.
Enhanced Development Processes: Integrates smoothly to boost secure coding initiatives.
Comprehensive Language Support: Facilitates scanning in multiple programming languages, accommodating diverse needs.

Industries implement Checkmarx One for secure coding compliance and vulnerability management across varying environments, choosing between cloud and on-premises deployment based on requirements. Its extensive language support and integration with DevSecOps practices make it a popular choice for organizations aiming to enhance software security.

Checkmarx

Kiuwan offers comprehensive security and vulnerability testing capabilities, focusing on code analysis, fast scanning, and detailed risk assessments. Supporting many technologies, it integrates well into development workflows to ensure code compliance and enhance code quality.

Known for its application portfolio governance, Kiuwan provides fast scanning and reporting features, alongside an intuitive interface. It supports languages from COBOL to JavaScript, offering modular capabilities and security integration for continuous deployment. Developers can perform efficient local or cloud-based scans, benefiting from action plans for better code correction. Integration with tools like Jenkins facilitates quick processing and detailed risk assessments, while challenges remain in language support expansion and smoother integration with Azure DevOps and popular IDEs. Enhanced frameworks and mobile development testing would amplify its utility, with users seeking improved navigation, report downloading, and technical support.

What are the most important features of Kiuwan?

Fast Scanning: Provides quick scans for immediate insights.
Reporting: Robust features for generating detailed reports.
Intuitive UI: Easy-to-navigate interface.
Technology Coverage: Supports a range of languages from COBOL to JS.
Tool Integration: Seamlessly integrates with Jenkins for CI/CD processes.
Modularity: Allows specific models for targeted analysis.

What benefits or ROI should users look for in Kiuwan reviews?

Enhanced Code Security: Identifies vulnerabilities swiftly and efficiently.
Continuous Integration: Facilitates ongoing security assessments.
Improved Code Compliance: Helps maintain adherence to coding standards.
Actionable Insights: Provides risk assessments with actionable recommendations.

In industries focused on software development, Kiuwan is integral for security and vulnerability assessments. It's embedded into workflows to analyze, detect and correct vulnerabilities, addressing threats like SQL injection and adhering to OWASP Top 10. The tool supports secure coding practices and performance evaluation, aiding organizations in maintaining rigorous security standards.

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

Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan