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
3rd
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (17th), Container Security (15th), 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 (1st)
Kiuwan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
30th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
26th
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 April 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 9.2%, down from 10.6% 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 One9.2%
Kiuwan1.2%
Other89.6%
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."
"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 is always updating to continuously add items that create a level of safety from vulnerabilities, and they are always ahead of the game when it comes to finding any vulnerabilities within the database, so I am assured that when I am scanning my product those vulnerabilities are identified at very initial stages, giving my development team more time to react."
"The user interface is modern and nice to use."
"The solution has good performance, it is able to compute in 10 to 15 minutes."
"The features and technologies are very good. The flexibility and the roadmap have also been very good. They're at the forefront of delivering the additional capabilities that are required with cloud delivery, etc. Their ability to deliver what customers require and when they require is very important."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the Best Fix Location and the Payments option because you can save a lot of time trying to mitigate the configuration. Using these tools can save you a lot of time."
"What I like best about Checkmarx is that it has fewer false positives than other products, giving you better results."
"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."
"We switched because Kiuwan covers the entire SDLC; provides direct information to act upon, for the developer, architects, QA, CIO and CISO, in a few seconds; automatically, fully integrated in any CI/CD setup."
"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."
"Customer service is excellent."
"I find it immensely helpful because it's not just about generating code; it's about ensuring efficiency in the execution."
"The solution has a continuous integration process."
"For the moment, this is a solution that I could recommend."
"This solution helps us to catch issues early on, and find problems that we never knew we had."
 

Cons

"Licensing models and Swift language support are the aspects in which this product needs to improve. Swift is a new language, in which major customers require support for lower prices."
"It is an expensive solution."
"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."
"This solution is not very easily scalable, and seems to lack the capability to manage a high volume of applications."
"Checkmarx being Windows only is a hindrance. Another problem is: why can't I choose PostgreSQL?"
"The reports are good, but they still need to be improved considering what the UI offers."
"In terms of dashboarding, the solution could provide a little more flexibility in terms of creating more dashboards. It has some of its own dashboards that come out of the box. However, if I have to implement my own dashboards that are aligned to my organization's requirements, that dashboarding feature has limited capability right now."
"Checkmarx One can be improved by reducing noise and improving false positive filtering."
"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."
"More languages and frameworks would enhance this tool."
"The configuration hasn't been that good."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"Perhaps more languages supported."
"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."
"The development-to-delivery phase."
"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's relatively expensive."
"The tool's pricing is fine."
"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."
"We have a subscription license that is on a yearly basis, and it's a pretty competitive solution."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"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 pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
"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."
"This solution is cheaper than other tools."
"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."
"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."
"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."
"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"Check with your account manager."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
886,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
6%
University
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
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 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...
What needs improvement with Checkmarx?
One way Checkmarx One could be improved is if it could automatically run scans every month after implementation. If it is possible to set it in the SAST portal to scan the repositories automaticall...
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: April 2026.
886,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.