Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Checkmarx and Kiuwan are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Checkmarx is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.3, while Kiuwan is ranked #34. Checkmarx holds a 7.0% mindshare in AS, compared to Kiuwan’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of Kiuwan users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx One

Read 81 Checkmarx One reviews

30,538 Views
16,491 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Kiuwan

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

4,202 Views
3,320 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

Kiuwan

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: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 918,970 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 (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

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
Product	Mindshare (%)
Checkmarx One	7.0%
Kiuwan	1.2%
Other	91.8%

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

"It allows for SAST scanning of uncompiled code. Further, it natively integrates with all key repos formats (Git, TFS, SVN, Perforce, etc)."

"We use the solution for dynamic application testing."

"Checkmarx has helped us deliver more secure products. We are able to do static code analysis with the tool before shipping our code to production. When the integration is in the pipeline, this tool gives us early notifications on code fixes."

"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are difficult to pinpoint because of the way the functionalities and the features are intertwined, it's difficult to say which part of them I prefer most. You initiate the scan, you have a scan, you have the review set, and reporting, they all work together as one whole process. It's not like accounting software, where you have the different features, et cetera."

"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."

"The identification of verification-related security vulnerabilities is really important and one of the key things, and it also identifies vulnerabilities for any kind of third-party tool coming into the system or any third-party tools that you are using, which is very useful for avoiding random hacking."

"The administration in Checkmarx is very good."

"As an InfoSec consulting company, we come across major challenging projects, and Checkmarx has made life easy by reducing manual efforts in using test cases against any vulnerability found during source code reviews while intelligently finding the latest vulnerabilities beyond the OWASP Top Ten."

More Checkmarx One pros

"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."

"The solution offers very good technical support."

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

"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."

"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 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."

"Saving time and money by automatically identifying problems is unbelievable."

"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"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."

"When we first ran it on a big project, there wasn't enough memory on the computer. It originally ran with eight gigabytes, and now it runs with 32. The software stopped at some point, and while I don't think it said it ran out of memory, it just said "stopped" and something else. We had to go to the logs and send them to the integrator, and eventually, they found a memory issue in the logs and recommended increasing the memory. We doubled it once, and it didn't seem enough. We doubled it again, and it helped."

"The resolutions should also be provided. For example, if the user faces any problem regarding an installation due to the internal security policies of their company, there should be a resolution offered."

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

"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."

"When we have many applications to check, I need to wait a long time in the queue."

"Checkmarx could probably do something to improve their license model."

"The lack of ability to review compiled source code. It would then be able to compete with other scanning tools, such as Veracode."

More Checkmarx One cons

"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 QA developer and security could be improved."

"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."

"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."

"It could improve its scalability abilities."

"The development-to-delivery phase."

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

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

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."

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

"The pricing is competitive and provides a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) for achieving application security."

"Checkmarx is not a cheap scanning tool, but none of the security tools are cheap. Checkmarx is a powerful scanning tool, and it’s essential to have one of these products."

"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."

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

"The price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is expensive."

More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice

"Check with your account manager."

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

"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."

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

"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."

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

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

918,970 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

Outsourcing Company

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

University

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 21% of the time

Veracode vs Checkmarx One

Compared 3% of the time

Checkmarx SAST vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

Snyk vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

More Checkmarx One Competitors

SonarQube vs Kiuwan

Compared 15% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 12% of the time

GitHub vs Kiuwan

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Kiuwan

Compared 4% of the time

Snyk vs Kiuwan

Compared 3% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One

October 2026

Download Checkmarx One product report

Buyer's Guide

Kiuwan

October 2026

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.

Kiuwan

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

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan

September 2026

Free Report: Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan

Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

918,970 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.