Checkmarx One vs PyCharm comparison

Checkmarx and JetBrains are both solutions in the Static Code Analysis category. Checkmarx is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.2, while JetBrains is ranked #6 with an average rating of 8.4. Checkmarx holds a 10.1% mindshare in SCAS, compared to JetBrains’s 2.2% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of JetBrains users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx One

Read 81 Checkmarx One reviews

18,784 Views
2,066 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

PyCharm

Read 15 PyCharm reviews

809 Views
809 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

PyCharm

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 2024

Checkmarx One and PyCharm compete in the software development tools category, with Checkmarx focusing on security and PyCharm serving as an IDE. PyCharm may have the upper hand due to its versatility as an IDE with various coding efficiency features.

Features: Checkmarx One offers comprehensive code scanning capabilities, identifies security vulnerabilities without code compilation, and supports numerous programming languages. PyCharm features smart code analysis, built-in debugging capabilities, and seamless GitHub integration, enhancing coding efficiency.

Room for Improvement: Checkmarx One could improve by reducing false positives, expanding language integration, and offering more flexible licensing models. PyCharm could enhance memory efficiency, further extend language support, and simplify its Python Notebook integration interface.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Checkmarx One supports private, public, and hybrid cloud deployments alongside on-premises setups, with customer service rated 8/10. PyCharm offers on-premises and public cloud deployment options, also enjoying a reputation for efficient customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Checkmarx One’s pricing is perceived as high but justified by its effective security capabilities, though its licensing models are seen as complex. PyCharm offers a free Community edition and a reasonably priced Professional version, highlighting its cost-effectiveness with a free tier and flexible paid options.

To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx One vs. PyCharm Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. PyCharm

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 883,448 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 Static Code Analysis

2nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (2nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (17th), Container Security (15th), 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

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of March 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 Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Checkmarx One	10.1%
PyCharm	2.2%
Other	87.7%

Static Code Analysis

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

Sahil Sanskar Jha

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.

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

"Checkmarx One has definitely helped us to save time and reduce the need for additional security resources, meaning employees."

"I have seen a return on investment from Checkmarx One."

"We were using HPE Security Fortify to scan code for security vulnerabilities, but it can scan only after a successful compile. If the code has dependencies or build errors, the scan fails. With Checkmarx, pre-compile scanning is seamless. This allows us to scan more code."

"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."

"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."

"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 administration in Checkmarx is very good."

"The most valuable features are the easy to understand interface, and it 's very user-friendly."

More Checkmarx One pros

"The solution has a great debugging feature."

"The product's IDE feature is quite user-friendly."

"It is an excellent, fully integrated IDE with smart code analysis capability and a built-in debugger. It is a fantastic tool."

"The integrated code structure makes coding more organized and manageable compared to using Python alone."

"PyCharm is saving me time and money in general."

"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."

"Good syntax highlighting and very it's very customizable."

"The automated package installation is helpful. I like the code highlighting features. A huge library of plugins is available, including AI coding tools, though I don't use those myself. The debugging tools are good, showing errors and problem lines."

More PyCharm pros

Cons

"The reports are good, but they still need to be improved considering what the UI offers."

"Creating and editing custom rules in Checkmarx is difficult because the license for the editor comes at an additional cost, and there is a steep learning curve."

"If it is a very large code base then we have a problem where we cannot scan it."

"It is an expensive solution."

"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."

"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."

"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."

"Checkmarx needs to be more scalable for large enterprise companies."

More Checkmarx One cons

"The breakpoints could be improved as they are not that intuitive to use."

"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."

"A potential area of improvement in PyCharm at this point would be memory efficiency."

"Notebooks in PyCharm is not as intuitive as it could be."

"The user interface and overall user experience could be more intuitive to make it easier for users to navigate and utilize the software effectively."

"The solution is heavy because running it on laptops consumes a lot of memory and power. Typically, a laptop battery might last about eight to nine hours, but with the tool running, it reduces to two hours or one and a half hours at most. It is designed to handle large projects and heavy tasks, making it resource-intensive. For smaller projects, use IDEs like Visual Studio Code."

"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."

"They should improve the product's interactiveness."

More PyCharm cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

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

"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."

"We're using a commercial version of Checkmarx, and we paid for the solution for one year. The price is high and could be reduced."

"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."

"We have a subscription license that is on a yearly basis, and it's a pretty competitive solution."

"We have purchased an annual license to use this solution. The price is reasonable."

More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice

"The community edition is free and the professional edition has a licensing fee."

"The community edition is free, which is good."

"I don't have much info on the pricing, but I would say it is somewhat competitive."

"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 price is reasonable."

"I use the free community version, so I'm saving money there."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Code Analysis solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

883,448 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Performing Arts

15%

University

14%

Marketing Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

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	8
Midsize Enterprise	1
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 do you like most about Checkmarx?

Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%.

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

What do you like most about PyCharm?

The integrated code structure makes coding more organized and manageable compared to using Python alone.

See all answers

What needs improvement with PyCharm?

The breakpoints could be improved as they are not that intuitive to use.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for PyCharm?

I use PyCharm for work, specifically for coding.

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs Checkmarx One

Compared 47% of the time

Veracode vs Checkmarx One

Compared 4% of the time

Checkmarx SAST vs Checkmarx One

Compared 3% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Checkmarx One

Compared 3% of the time

Fortify Software Security Center vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

More Checkmarx One Competitors

OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs PyCharm

Compared 61% of the time

Mend.io vs PyCharm

Compared 39% of the time

More PyCharm Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One

February 2026

Download Checkmarx One product report

Buyer's Guide

Static Code Analysis

February 2026

Download PyCharm product report

Overview

Checkmarx One is an enterprise cloud-native application security platform focused on providing cross-tool, correlated results to help AppSec and developer teams prioritize where to focus time and resources.

Checkmarx One offers comprehensive application scanning across the SDLC:

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
API security
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
Container security
IaC security
Correlation, prioritization, and risk management
Codebashing secure code training
AI security
Tech partnerships extending AppSec into runtime analysis
Developer tool integrations including: CI/CD tools, development frameworks, feedback tools, IDEs, programming languages and SCMs

Checkmarx One provides everything you need to secure application development from the first line of code through deployment and runtime in the cloud. With an ever-evolving set of AppSec engines, correlation and prioritization features, and AI capabilities, Checkmarx One helps consolidate expanding lists of AppSec tools and make better sense of results. Its capabilities are designed to provide an improved developer experience to build trust with development teams and ensure the success of your AppSec program investment.

Checkmarx

Be More Productive
Save time while PyCharm takes care of the routine. Focus on the bigger things and embrace the keyboard-centric approach to get the most of PyCharm's many productivity features.

JetBrains

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. PyCharm

February 2026

Free Report: Checkmarx One vs. PyCharm

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

883,448 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx One vs. PyCharm report.

See our list of best Static Code Analysis vendors.

We monitor all Static Code Analysis 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.