No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Checkmarx One vs PyCharm comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 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 Static Code Analysis
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (17th), Container Security (16th), 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)
PyCharm
Ranking in Static Code Analysis
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Static Code Analysis category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.1%, down from 21.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PyCharm is 2.2%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Code Analysis Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One10.1%
PyCharm2.2%
Other87.7%
Static Code Analysis
 

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.
Sahil Sanskar Jha - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant Manager at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Advanced machine learning workflows have become faster but still need better memory efficiency
In PyCharm, I find several components and libraries to be the most valuable. The support that Jupyter Notebook offers is essential, as we work through Jupyter regularly. Scientific libraries such as NumPy, Pandas, Matplotlib, and Plotly are integral to our work. Machine learning libraries including scikit-learn, PyTorch, and TensorFlow are used extensively. Hugging Face integration is particularly valuable because it is easily findable, the documentation is comprehensive, and it can be directly integrated with the IDEs we work with. The intelligent code editor in PyCharm definitely helps me manage code quality and efficiency in my projects. When using these libraries, it makes parallelization of data very efficient, allowing me to use multi-thread programming architecture. The code can work for multiple datasets rather than one at a time. With native Python code, a machine learning deployment taking 45 to 50 minutes to calculate can be efficiently reduced to a minute or half a second using these libraries.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The best features Checkmarx One offers, in my opinion, are that it is easy to use, and there is not much deep diving into this."
"The reports are very good because they include details on the code level, and make suggestions about how to fix the problems."
"Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%."
"Vulnerability details is valuable."
"We use the solution for dynamic application testing."
"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 solution allows us to create custom rules for code checks."
"After scanning, it shows in-depth code of where actual vulnerabilities are, which helps us to analyze them."
"Good syntax highlighting and very it's very customizable."
"With native Python code, a machine learning deployment taking 45 to 50 minutes to calculate can be efficiently reduced to a minute or half a second using these libraries."
"The best feature of PyCharm is that it gives you hints whenever it detects any issues while you are coding. This is important because it helps us code faster and without any errors."
"The product's IDE feature is quite user-friendly."
"The latest AI features and tab completion features are good."
"The solution has a great debugging feature."
"It is an excellent, fully integrated IDE with smart code analysis capability and a built-in debugger. It is a fantastic tool."
"The solution provides a good comprehensive debugging feature that I like and which is easy to use."
 

Cons

"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"Scanning speed optimization is an area where improvements can be made, and we can reduce false positives."
"The lack of ability to review compiled source code. It would then be able to compete with other scanning tools, such as Veracode."
"The integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."
"Checkmarx needs to be more scalable for large enterprise companies."
"Checkmarx One is often down when the cloud provider experiences issues. A more fail-tolerant solution needs to be created."
"I would like the product to include more debugging and developed tools. It needs to also add enhancements on the coding side."
"Customizing the tool can make it complicated."
"The solution does not support some features of OpenCV even though it is part of a PyCharm package."
"The refactor facility in PyCharm is not on par with the refactor facility in IntelliJ. It could be improved since IntelliJ offers many more options for refactoring."
"The user interface and overall user experience could be more intuitive to make it easier for users to navigate and utilize the software effectively."
"There is room for improvement in memory usage. It uses too much memory. It can get a bit heavy, especially when you have too many open files and the system becomes very slow."
"The navigation can be better."
"They give some functionality to use Python Notebook, but it's not great."
"One issue with JetBrains tools, including PyCharm, is their heavy resource usage. They can be slow to start, especially when beginning a new project, as it takes some time to index."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have purchased an annual license to use this solution. The price is reasonable."
"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
"The average deal size was usually anywhere between $120K to $175K on an annual basis, which could be divided across 12 months."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
"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."
"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."
"It is an expensive solution."
"Most of my customers opted for a perpetual license. They prefer to pay the highest amount up front for the perpetual license and then pay for additional support annually."
"The community edition is free and the professional edition has a licensing fee."
"I use the free community version, so I'm saving money there."
"They have a free Community edition, and they also have a licensed version. They definitely have an annual license. They probably also have a monthly license. Its pricing is good and reasonable. It is a little bit more expensive than the others, but it is well worth it. I would rate it a four out of five in terms of pricing."
"The community edition is free, which is good."
"The price is reasonable."
"I don't have much info on the pricing, but I would say it is somewhat competitive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Code Analysis solutions are best for your needs.
885,789 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%
Performing Arts
14%
University
13%
Marketing Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

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 Business8
Midsize Enterprise1
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...
What do you like most about PyCharm?
The integrated code structure makes coding more organized and manageable compared to using Python alone.
What needs improvement with PyCharm?
A potential area of improvement in PyCharm at this point would be memory efficiency. PyCharm is based on its IntelliJ platform, which is Java-based, meaning it can be very memory-intensive, especia...
What is your primary use case for PyCharm?
My main use case for PyCharm is for machine learning operations.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. PyCharm and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
885,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.