We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Wallarm NG WAF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The value you can get out of the speedy production may be worth the price tag."
"I like that you don't have to compile the code in order to execute static code analysis. So, it's very handy."
"The SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."
"The user interface is excellent. It's very user friendly."
"One of the most valuable features is it is flexible."
"The solution improved the efficiency of our code security reviews. It helps tremendously because it finds hundreds of potential problems sometimes."
"The solution is scalable, but other solutions are better."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are difficult to pinpoint because of the way the functionalities and the features are intertwined, it's difficult to say which part of them I prefer most. You initiate the scan, you have a scan, you have the review set, and reporting, they all work together as one whole process. It's not like accounting software, where you have the different features, et cetera."
"Helps us to monitor situation in regards to attacks to our sites and prevents a lot of them."
"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."
"Checkmarx could improve the REST APIs by including automation."
"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."
"I really would like to integrate it as a service along with the SAP HANA Cloud Platform. It will then be easy to use it directly as a service."
"In terms of dashboarding, the solution could provide a little more flexibility in terms of creating more dashboards. It has some of its own dashboards that come out of the box. However, if I have to implement my own dashboards that are aligned to my organization's requirements, that dashboarding feature has limited capability right now."
"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
"Checkmarx is not good because it has too many false positive issues."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"The biggest problem for us was the stability and speed using the first version of Wallarm. Now, it is fine."
Earn 20 points
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in API Security with 67 reviews while Wallarm NG WAF is ranked 8th in API Security. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Wallarm NG WAF is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Wallarm NG WAF writes "Active threat detection and adaptive rules are the most valuable for us". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Wallarm NG WAF is most compared with Salt Security, Noname Security, AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF and Cloudflare. See our Checkmarx One vs. Wallarm NG WAF report.
See our list of best API Security vendors.
We monitor all API Security 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.