Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

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
2nd
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 (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (8th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (2nd)
Kiuwan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
28th
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 March 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 9.9%, down from 11.0% 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 One9.9%
Kiuwan1.2%
Other88.9%
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

"It gives the proper code flow of vulnerabilities and the number of occurrences."
"It has all the features we need."
"Helps us check vulnerabilities in our SAP Fiori application."
"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."
"It allows for SAST scanning of uncompiled code. Further, it natively integrates with all key repos formats (Git, TFS, SVN, Perforce, etc)."
"The reports are very good because they include details on the code level, and make suggestions about how to fix the problems."
"Our static operation security has been able to identify more security issues since implementing this solution."
"The main thing we find valuable about Checkmarx is the ease of use. It's easy to initiate scans and triage defects."
"I find it immensely helpful because it's not just about generating code; it's about ensuring efficiency in the execution."
"Software analytics for a lot of different languages including ABAP."
"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."
"The solution has a continuous integration process."
"I've tried many open source applications and the remediation or correction actions that were provided by Kiuwan were very good in comparison."
"For the moment, this is a solution that I could recommend."
"The solution offers very good technical support."
"Customer service is excellent."
 

Cons

"One area for improvement in Checkmarx is pricing, as it's more expensive than other products."
"Dynamic testing. If it had that feature I would have liked to see more consideration of framework validations that we don't have to duplicate. These flags are false positives."
"You can't use it in the continuous delivery pipeline because the scanning takes too much time."
"They should make it more container-friendly and optimized for the CI pipeline. They should make it a little less heavy. Right now, it requires a SQL database, and the way the tool works is that it has an engine and then it has an analysis database in which it stores the information. So, it is pretty heavy from that perspective because you have to have a full SQL Server. They're working on something called Checkmarx Light, which is a slim-down version. They haven't released it yet, but that's what we need. There should be something a little more slimmed down that can just run the analysis and output the results in a format that's readable as opposed to having a full, really big, and thick deployment with a full database server."
"Licensing models and Swift language support are the aspects in which this product needs to improve."
"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."
"Integration into the SDLC (i.e. support for last version of SonarQube) could be added."
"The validation process needs to be sped up."
"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives."
"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."
"The QA developer and security could be improved."
"The development-to-delivery phase."
"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"More languages and frameworks would enhance this tool."
"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is competitive and provides a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) for achieving application security."
"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."
"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."
"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."
"The average deal size was usually anywhere between $120K to $175K on an annual basis, which could be divided across 12 months."
"The solution is costly."
"It is a good product but a little overpriced."
"The price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is expensive."
"Check with your account manager."
"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."
"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."
"This solution is cheaper than other tools."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"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.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
6%
University
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Performing Arts
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: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.