Checkmarx One vs Rapid7 InsightAppSec comparison

Checkmarx and Rapid7 are both solutions in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category. Checkmarx is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1, while Rapid7 is ranked #5 with an average rating of 7.7. Checkmarx holds a 15.3% mindshare in DAST, compared to Rapid7’s 5.8% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of Rapid7 users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx One

Read 81 Checkmarx One reviews

20,225 Views
2,225 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Rapid7 InsightAppSec

Read 20 Rapid7 InsightAppSec reviews

2,311 Views
878 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

Rapid7 InsightAppSec

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Rapid7 InsightAppSec based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx One vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 887,041 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 Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

2nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (3rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (17th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (4th), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (1st)

Rapid7 InsightAppSec

Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

5th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

AI Observability (14th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 15.3%, down from 24.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 InsightAppSec is 5.8%, up from 4.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Checkmarx One	15.3%
Rapid7 InsightAppSec	5.8%
Other	78.9%

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

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

Shritam Bhowmick

Vulnerability Management Lead at garrett

Provides reliable applications security but needs better integration options

There are areas for improvements regarding false positives. Integration capabilities are lacking, as options for integrations with other tools such as SNOW, Jira, or other integration tools are not sufficient in Rapid7 InsightAppSec. The user interface sometimes has glitches, which may prevent appropriate results during navigation, and even when we get appropriate results, it can be impossible to export them to CSV records or download files. Regarding scalability, Rapid7 InsightAppSec is not a scalable solution for our industry due to limited integration capabilities. Rapid7 relies on another tool called InsightConnect, which requires additional investment, detracting from scalability. Another area that needs improvement is the integration of AI capabilities into the platform. Both Rapid7 InsightAppSec and InsightVM need to advance in that area. In terms of behavioral and pattern recognition, identifying complex attacks such as SQL, blind SQL, JSON, and LDAP injections often results in 94% false positives. This necessitates improvement in their behavioral-based analytics feature.

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

"The SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."

"It's not an obstacle for developers. They can easily write their code and make it more secure with Checkmarx."

"The process of remediating software security vulnerabilities can now be performed (ongoing) as portions of the application are being built in advance of being compiled."

"As an InfoSec consulting company, we come across major challenging projects, and Checkmarx has made life easy by reducing manual efforts in using test cases against any vulnerability found during source code reviews while intelligently finding the latest vulnerabilities beyond the OWASP Top Ten."

"Overall, I use Checkmarx One as a strategic control point to improve developer velocity while strengthening application security across the full software lifecycle."

"The visibility the solution gives you is great; it really gives you the ability to see what the root issues in the code actually are."

"Security can be part of the SDLC and reduce the cost of vulnerability remediation."

More Checkmarx One pros

"Relatively speaking, InsightAppSec is good compared to Insight VM."

"The solution is stable."

"The reporting functionality is excellent."

"Customers use the product for scanning purposes and do not want to be restricted with respect to the number of scans they perform."

"Rapid7 InsightAppSec helps us in both regulatory compliance and in strengthening our security posture."

"Relatively speaking, InsightAppSec is good compared to Insight VM."

"It is a very robust solution."

"I would rate the technical support from Rapid7 a ten, indicating high-quality support."

More Rapid7 InsightAppSec pros

Cons

"This solution is not very easily scalable, and seems to lack the capability to manage a high volume of applications."

"We can run only one project at a time."

"Licensing models and Swift language support are the aspects in which this product needs to improve."

"For Checkmarx One, I think that adding repositories and scanning impromptu code could improve it."

"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."

"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 interactive application security testing, or IAST, the interactive part where you're looking at an application that lives in a runtime environment on a server or virtual machine, needs improvement."

"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."

More Checkmarx One cons

"The product’s pricing could be flexible."

"The reporting feature of Rapid7 InsightAppSec needs improvement as it currently provides basic reports."

"They should add more features. I would like to see them do a little more on static analysis and also interactivity analysis."

"The interface should be a little bit easier to manage. Sometimes, the logic that they use is kind of strange. They need to work a little bit more on their interface to make it more understandable. The interface is the only problem. I'm using Rapid7, which is very intuitive. There are other applications available in the market with a better interface. They can include more techniques or options to test different types of security because the templates are limited. It would be great to see them follow the MITRE ATT&CK framework or what is there in tools like Veracode and Synopsys."

"The only concern I have with Rapid7 is that it does not provide enough information about vulnerabilities within AppSec."

"There is room for improvement in Rapid7 InsightAppSec by giving clients the ability for extra columns on reports and enabling the extraction of remediation reports into a CSV format. Currently, the PDF format is cumbersome to go through when dealing with thousands of pages."

"The reporting is definitely an aspect of the solution that's in need of some work."

"We get a lot of false positives during the tests."

More Rapid7 InsightAppSec cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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."

"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."

"The solution is costly."

"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 is the right price for quality delivery."

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

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

More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice

"They offer a good price, but I don't remember its cost. It is fair as compared to the competition. We have opted for project-based licensing, not user-based. We can add any number of users. That doesn't matter. It is worth the money."

"Its price is competitive. It is not expensive."

"Rapid7 InsightAppSec is cheap."

"I rate Rapid7 InsightAppSec’s pricing an eight out of ten."

"The price of this product is very cheap."

"I'm not sure how much it costs exactly, but I know it's expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

887,041 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

10%

Computer Software Company

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	12
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	5

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 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 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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Rapid7 InsightAppSec?

Customers sometimes experience issues with performance. One thing that I recall is that most customers often want to have reporting as per their customized dashboard. This needs to be improved beca...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Rapid7 InsightAppSec?

I usually recommend this solution for financial institutions. Banks and financial institutions need this solution mostly because they have to follow stringent compliance advisory requirements, so t...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Rapid7 InsightAppSec?

I have not heard any complaints. I do not have any recommendations because customers were initially worried about the number of scans they used to perform, and now it has been enhanced or it will s...

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs Checkmarx One

Compared 38% 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 2% of the time

Fortify Software Security Center vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

More Checkmarx One Competitors

Invicti vs Rapid7 InsightAppSec

Compared 13% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Rapid7 InsightAppSec

Compared 11% of the time

AppCheck vs Rapid7 InsightAppSec

Compared 10% of the time

Veracode vs Rapid7 InsightAppSec

Compared 9% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Rapid7 InsightAppSec

Compared 6% of the time

More Rapid7 InsightAppSec Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One

April 2026

Download Checkmarx One product report

Buyer's Guide

Rapid7 InsightAppSec

April 2026

Download Rapid7 InsightAppSec product report

Also Known As

No data available

InsightAppSec

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

Your web applications may be complex, but your application security testing tool doesn’t need to be. InsightAppSec brings Rapid7’s proven Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) technology to the Insight platform, combining powerful application crawling and attack capabilities, flexibility in scan scope and scheduling, and accuracy in results with a modern UI, intuitive workflows, and sensible data organization. This enables you to identify XSS, SQL injection, CSRF, and other vulnerabilities with unparalleled ease. The best part? All of these capabilities are delivered via the cloud so that you’re up and running in minutes to identify the critical security risks that exist in your applications.

Rapid7

Sample Customers

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

CenterPoint Energy, CPA Australia, Hypertherm, First American Financial Corporation, Rackspace

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec

February 2026

Free Report: Checkmarx One vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec

Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

887,041 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx One vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec report.

See our list of best Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) vendors.

We monitor all Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) 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.