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

Checkmarx One vs Rapid7 AppSpider comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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)
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Vulnerability Management (12th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (5th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (9th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (4th), AI Security (3rd)
Rapid7 AppSpider
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
31st
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 October 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 8.1%, down from 10.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 AppSpider is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One8.1%
Rapid7 AppSpider0.8%
Other91.1%
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

"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"The report function is the solution's greatest asset."
"The main advantage of this solution is its centralized reporting functionality, which lets us track issues, then see and report on the priorities via a web portal."
"Most valuable features include: ease of use, dashboard. interface and the ability to report."
"The only thing I like is that Checkmarx does not need to compile."
"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."
"The scalability of the solution is good."
"Even if there are multiple vulnerabilities in the source coding, Checkmarx is able to identify which lines need to be corrected and then proceeds to automatically remediate the situation."
"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."
"AppSpider's most valuable feature is reporting - everything is stored in the local database so it can be sent to other machines."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting, which is compliant with international standards."
"The entire solution is interactive and has a point-and-click user experience, which makes it easy to find items or drill down on information, and you don't need specialized skills to use the product."
"When it is set up properly, it can do scanning on web apps with multiple engines automatically."
"The solution is highly stable, rated at ten out of ten."
"It does a scan that performs about 100 checks on web applications and produces a clear report on all of the vulnerabilities that are found."
"I like the ability the product has to detect vulnerabilities quickly, when it has been released in our environment, then displaying them to us."
 

Cons

"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."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"Implementing a blackout time for any user or teams: Needs improvement."
"We had to lock the number of CPUs used to not crash the Checkmarx Audit."
"I would like the product to include more debugging and developed tools. It needs to also add enhancements on the coding side."
"Its user interface could be improved and made more friendly."
"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"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."
"The solution is too slow. It could take a full day to scan. Competitors are much faster."
"The tech support is responsive but issues remain unresolved."
"Integration could be better. For example, while doing the scanning, using the recording username and passwords, there are issues."
"AppSpider has some problems with the RAM needed while scanning."
"For Japanese customers, localization is needed. The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users."
"One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions."
"It needs better integration with mobile applications."
"This price of this solution is a little bit expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."
"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."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is 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."
"The tool's pricing is fine."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
"The price is pretty fair."
"AppSpider is closed-source software and you need to acquire a license in order to use it."
"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."
"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.
915,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
12%
University
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
9%
 

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 Business12
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 is the biggest difference between Veracode and Checkmarx?
According to my experience of using both the tools in different organizations Veracode is a Cloud-native, managed AppSec platform with strong focus on ease of use, it is SaaS delivery, and provide...
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: September 2026.
915,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.