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

Checkmarx One vs Rapid7 AppSpider 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 Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Vulnerability Management (17th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (7th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (2nd)
Rapid7 AppSpider
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
30th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.3%, down from 11.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 AppSpider is 0.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Checkmarx One10.3%
Rapid7 AppSpider0.7%
Other89.0%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

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.
HW
Marketing Expert at J's communication
Clients benefit from broad authentication and effective crawling but need localization improvements
Our clients use AppSpider to address security concerns for their websites. It is particularly used by customers who require security assessments One of the most valuable features of AppSpider is its broad range of authentication identification, which is a key reason for its utilization.…

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 for me is the Jenkins Plugin."
"Our static operation security has been able to identify more security issues since implementing this solution."
"Once you implement Checkmarx One, you can be sure that you're getting value from the solution almost immediately because Checkmarx One also handles false positives very effectively, saving you time and saving your developers time."
"The most valuable feature is that it actually identifies the different criteria you can set to meet whatever standards you're trying to get your system accredited for."
"It's not an obstacle for developers. They can easily write their code and make it more secure with Checkmarx."
"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."
"The most valuable feature is the simple user interface."
"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."
"When it is set up properly, it can do scanning on web apps with multiple engines automatically."
"AppSpider's most valuable feature is reporting - everything is stored in the local database so it can be sent to other machines."
"Rapid7 AppSpider is good at managing different applications. It uses applets and generates reports to cover the PCA/GDPR compliance requirements."
"The solution is highly stable, rated at ten out of ten."
"It scans all the components developed within a web application."
"What I like most about AppSpider is that it's easy to use and its automated scan gives me all the details I need to know when it comes to vulnerabilities and their solutions."
"The setup is usually straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of Rapid7 AppSpider is the vulnerability reporting data. Additionally, the data is reported in a convenient way rather than seeing them as a PDF. We are able to generate all the reports exactly what we want in a flexible way."
 

Cons

"Checkmarx One can be improved by reducing noise and improving false positive filtering."
"We would like to be able to run scans from our local system, rather than having to always connect to the product server, which is a longer process."
"You can't use it in the continuous delivery pipeline because the scanning takes too much time."
"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."
"The product's reporting feature could be better. The feature works well for developers, but reports generated to be shared with external parties are poor, it lacks the details one gets when viewing the results directly from the Checkmarx One platform."
"Checkmarx One can be improved on the side of faster scans, especially when our CI pipelines are scanning for vulnerabilities."
"Checkmarx could improve the solution reports and false positives. The false positives could be reduced. For example, we have alerts that are tagged as vulnerabilities but when you drill down they are not."
"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."
"Integration could be better."
"The enterprise interface is too simple. It should be more customizable."
"AppSpider has some problems with the RAM needed while scanning."
"There are some glitches with stability, and it is an area for improvement."
"Support response times are slow and can be improved."
"For Japanese customers, localization is needed. The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users."
"It needs better integration with mobile applications."
"One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The number of users and coverage for languages will have an impact on the cost of the license."
"I would rate the solution’s pricing an eight out of ten. The tool’s pricing is higher than others and it is for the license alone."
"Its price is fair. It is in or around the right spot. Ultimately, if the price is wrong, customers won't commit, but they do tend to commit. It is neither too cheap nor too expensive."
"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."
"Before implementing the product I would evaluate if it is really necessary to scan so many different languages and frameworks. If not, I think there must be a cheaper solution for scanning Java-only applications (which are 90% of our applications)."
"It's relatively expensive."
"​Checkmarx is not a cheap scanning tool, but none of the security tools are cheap. Checkmarx is a powerful scanning tool, and it’s essential to have one of these products."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"It is expensive if you want to buy the Enterprise version that is able to scan multiple applications at once."
"The licensing cost depends on the number of users."
"AppSpider is closed-source software and you need to acquire a license in order to use it."
"The price is pretty fair."
"The price of Rapid7 AppSpider cost 9,000 annually but there is limited usage. Large companies are able to negotiate a better price or a better deal for the usage with the vendor."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
882,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
Educational Organization
8%
 

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 Business11
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

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?
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Rapid7 AppSpider?
The price is not high, but for Japanese customers, localization may incur additional costs.
What needs improvement with Rapid7 AppSpider?
For Japanese customers, localization is needed. The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users.
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 AppSpider?
Our clients use AppSpider to address security concerns for their websites. It is particularly used by customers who require security assessments.
 

Also Known As

No data available
AppSpider
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Microsoft
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Rapid7 AppSpider and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
882,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.