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

Checkmarx One vs Polyspace Code Prover 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
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
70
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (22nd), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (8th)
Polyspace Code Prover
Ranking in Application Security Tools
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 11.0%, down from 15.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polyspace Code Prover is 1.2%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

ScottDenton - PeerSpot reviewer
Supports different languages, has excellent support, and easily expands
The interactive application security testing, or IAST, where code scans are being ran on an application that lives in a runtime environment on a server or virtual machine, needs improvement. There was limited support from different languages. It didn't support everything under the sun, so you would lose revenue since you didn't have support for Scala or some other language that your developer was fluent in. They needed to improve on language support. That is about it, really. The dev team did everything that they said they were going to do. If they said they were going to hit a mark, they'd hit a mark. That release would come out. Typically, they would do four major releases a year, quarterly, with two-point releases in between, or based on any additional hotfixes that may be needed. In most cases, however, IAST was the part of the product that needed to be improved the most. Codebashing is a really cool product from the aspect of teaching developers how to write secure code. However, it would be even cooler if you could not only point out and teach someone how to do it while also making the appropriate recommendation on how to rewrite the code itself, using machine learning or AI. Instead of you, the developer learning how to do it and then writing the code yourself, it'd be cooler if you could push a button, have it analyzed, scans the code, find the code, find the issue within the line of code, and then go ahead and automatically rewrite that code for you. Then, by repetition, it just teaches you through muscle memory how to do that as opposed to, "Hey, you've found this problem. This is where the problem's located, within this particular line of code." Right now, do you know how to rewrite Java? Well, if you're not familiar with how to do that, then go push on this button. Now, take this test and go through this exercise.” It doesn't make a recommendation. It's not like providing a script that fixes the problem. It's just teaching you on how to write the code in that form in that manner.
Aman Singla - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to setup with reliable outputs and good reliability
It is easy to set up the solution. We can actually modify it using script also. It's pretty easy to link it with our in-house toolchain with the Polyspace configuration settings. If we have small amounts of data, it's quick and you can set it up within ten to 15 minutes. However, depending on the size of the data and the variables, it could take a while since you have to provide a range for all variables. If you have, for example, 500 variables, you'll be configuring a lot. However, the input extremes can be fed using an Excel file or some other format.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The administration in Checkmarx is very good."
"It gives the proper code flow of vulnerabilities and the number of occurrences."
"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."
"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 solution communicates where to fix the issue for the purpose of less iterations."
"The report function is the solution's greatest asset."
"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."
"The reports are very good because they include details on the code level, and make suggestions about how to fix the problems."
"The outputs are very reliable."
"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."
 

Cons

"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"I would like to see the rate of false positives reduced."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"Micro-services need to be included in the next release."
"We are trying to find out if there is a way to identify the run-time null values. I am analyzing different tools to check if there is any tool that supports run-time null value identification, but I don't think any of the tools in the market currently supports this feature. It would be helpful if Checkmarx can identify and throw an exception for a null value at the run time. It would make things a lot easier if there is a way for Checkmarx to identify nullable fields or hard-coded values in the code. The accessibility for customized Checkmarx rules is currently limited and should be improved. In addition, it would be great if Checkmarx can do static code and dynamic code validation. It does a lot of security-related scanning, and it should also do static code and dynamic code validation. Currently, for security-related validation, we are using Checkmarx, and for static code and dynamic code validation, we are using some other tools. We are spending money on different tools. We can pay a little extra money and use Checkmarx for everything."
"I expect application security vendors to cover all aspects of application security, including SAST, DAST, and even mobile application security testing. And it would be much better if they provided an on-premises and cloud option for all these main application security features."
"Checkmarx could improve the speed of the scans."
"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 tool has some stability issues."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"Automation could be a challenge."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is costly."
"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."
"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."
"The pricing is competitive and provides a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) for achieving application security."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"It is the right price for quality delivery."
"We have a subscription license that is on a yearly basis, and it's a pretty competitive solution."
"We use the paid version."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
839,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
5%
Manufacturing Company
39%
Computer Software Company
12%
Transportation Company
5%
Government
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 do you like most about Checkmarx?
Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Checkmarx?
The pricing is relatively expensive due to the product's quality and performance, but it is worth it.
What do you like most about Polyspace Code Prover?
When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts,...
What needs improvement with Polyspace Code Prover?
I'm still trying to use constraints with range propagation, but I can't get it to work properly, and I haven't found any documentation. It require support. There could be an issue with range propag...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Polyspace Code Prover and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
839,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.