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

Acunetix vs Checkmarx One 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.9
Acunetix improves efficiency and security by automating vulnerability detection, reducing costs and manual testing efforts for businesses.
Sentiment score
5.6
Checkmarx One enhances security by automating vulnerability detection, reducing costs, and improving development efficiency through CI/CD integration.
It saves a significant amount of time by covering attack surfaces.
Information Security Engineer at Tübitak Bilgem
I have seen a return on investment, as Acunetix helps reduce the man-days and effort needed for scanning bulk applications through automated assessments.
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
I have seen a return on investment with Acunetix, including time saved and cost reduction, because it provides us threats on our web application servers.
cybersecurity Team Leader at EMAK
Overall, between the fast scanning, automation, automatic reporting, and easy detection, it has reduced manual effort enough that we did not need an extra reviewer, even as our codebase or team size grew.
Senior GenAI Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Based on my interactions with the clients, I can tell that there is a return on investment because if something is not profitable and it's not helping to save costs or vulnerabilities, clients wouldn't come back to renew their license year after year.
Chief Technology Officer at 3CS Aquarah Limited
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.4
Acunetix's customer service is praised for responsiveness, yet users experience varying response times and suggest improvements.
Sentiment score
7.0
Checkmarx One support is praised for quick responses and knowledgeable staff, despite some reporting delays in technical support.
For high-severity issues, they reach out within two to three hours, and for critical issues, a response is received within 15 minutes.
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
The technical support from Invicti is very good and fast.
Information Security Engineer at Tübitak Bilgem
Support staff not being familiar with the problem.
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
If you raise a support case with Checkmarx, it is handled smoothly.
ML Engineer - Specialist at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
The customer support team is amazing and they provide on-phone call, email support, and on-website support.
Senior Solution Architect | L3+ Systems & Cloud Engineer | SRE Specialist at Canada Cloud Solution
I have relied on Checkmarx One customer support hundreds of times for several things, and Checkmarx One support is very proactive and very responsive.
Chief Technology Officer at 3CS Aquarah Limited
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.9
Acunetix efficiently manages growing workloads with adaptable deployment despite scan speed and Linux support challenges, with user satisfaction.
Sentiment score
7.0
Checkmarx One is scalable for large workloads, but some users report challenges with configurations and licensing requirements.
Acunetix can handle increasing workloads and more applications easily.
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
Acunetix's scalability for my growing needs is great; it is a very scalable product compared to others.
cybersecurity Team Leader at EMAK
Approximately four billion lines of code are being scanned monthly.
Cyber Security Expert at Nestle
Since it is cloud-based, the infrastructure and PaaS, IaaS, and SaaS are taken care of by the cloud marketplace.
Senior Solution Architect | L3+ Systems & Cloud Engineer | SRE Specialist at Canada Cloud Solution
Checkmarx One's scalability has changed my organization because the strong collaboration between the development and security team helps us to do things much faster.
Senior GenAI Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.1
Acunetix is stable and reliable, with minimal issues and helpful support, offering consistent performance and reporting capabilities.
Sentiment score
7.3
Checkmarx One is generally stable but faces issues with large codebases, memory use, and session inconsistencies.
I did not need to reach customer support because the product is very stable.
cybersecurity Team Leader at EMAK
I would rate the stability of this solution a nine on a scale of 1 to 10 where one is low stability and 10 is high.
Specialist Leader at Deloitte
Checkmarx One is often down when the cloud provider experiences issues.
Cyber Security Expert at Nestle
 

Room For Improvement

Acunetix needs improved scanning speed, reduced false positives, better reporting, enhanced support, flexible licensing, and improved mobile integration.
Checkmarx One needs enhancements in accuracy, speed, integration, UI, support, pricing, and features for enterprise usability.
The main concern is related to false positives; Acunetix needs to work on identifying valid and invalid findings.
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
Acunetix should have better integration with newer tools such as GitHub and Azure DevOps.
CEO at Xcelliti
I believe Acunetix can improve customer support, as the dedicated support staff are often unfamiliar with problems and troubleshooting, leading to communication gaps that delay issue resolution.
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
Integration into the IDE being used would be beneficial so that code does not need to be uploaded to the website and an IDE-friendly report could be generated.
Senior Software Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
It could suggest how the code base is written and automatically populate the source code with three different solution options to choose from.
Specialist Leader at Deloitte
If you can improve the speed optimization, it takes around 30 to 40 minutes for checking a build. If you can make it within five minutes or 10 minutes, that would be great.
Senior Software Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
 

Setup Cost

Acunetix pricing is viewed as costly, with calls for more flexible and transparent pricing to match market standards.
Checkmarx One is often costly but provides quality and security, with costs varying by team size and selected modules.
The pricing cost is affordable for small and mid-sized organizations, and when compared to Checkmarx, it is significantly affordable, as Checkmarx is quite expensive.
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
We secured a special licensing model for penetration testing companies, which is cost-effective.
Information Security Engineer at Tübitak Bilgem
The pricing of Acunetix is pretty expensive and could be improved.
Senior Business Development Manager at Intouch World
For a small team under 50 developers, normal expenses come under 30 to 60K.
Senior Solution Architect | L3+ Systems & Cloud Engineer | SRE Specialist at Canada Cloud Solution
Due to the number of years I've implemented Checkmarx One, there are rebates and discounts from the OEM which makes it a lot more profitable.
Chief Technology Officer at 3CS Aquarah Limited
The pricing should be reasonable, matching what we are paying for.
Senior GenAI Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
 

Valuable Features

Acunetix excels in vulnerability detection, offers comprehensive reports, scalability, and ease of use for enhanced application security.
Checkmarx One offers comprehensive vulnerability scanning, seamless CI/CD integration, and enhances productivity with ease of use and automation.
Its most valuable role is in enhancing security by identifying potential vulnerabilities efficiently.
Senior Business Development Manager at Intouch World
The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities.
CEO at Xcelliti
The best feature Acunetix offers is the centralized dashboard and the quality of reports it generates, which includes various options for selecting reports and developer options for directly sharing the reports with developers.
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
Since replacing the previous tool, SAST and SCA scans are conducted in a couple of minutes instead of hours or days.
Cyber Security Expert at Nestle
The best features Checkmarx One offers, over the past years, include broad language and technical support that Checkmarx provides, covering most languages.
ML Engineer - Specialist at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Checkmarx One has positively impacted our organization as we tend to find vulnerabilities very early in the development cycle.
Product security engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
 

Categories and Ranking

Acunetix
Ranking in Application Security Tools
11th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
8th
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
19th
Ranking in DevSecOps
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Checkmarx One
Ranking in Application Security Tools
2nd
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
3rd
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
17th
Ranking in DevSecOps
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (7th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.1%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Checkmarx One is 9.9%, down from 11.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Checkmarx One9.9%
Acunetix2.1%
Other88.0%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Rahul Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
Identifies vulnerabilities across bulk web applications but needs better support and cleaner reports
The best feature Acunetix offers is the centralized dashboard and the quality of reports it generates, which includes various options for selecting reports and developer options for directly sharing the reports with developers. The centralized dashboard of Acunetix gives visibility into the security aspects of mass applications; for instance, with more than 200 applications, it provides a valuable overview of findings and necessary fixes, along with a high-level summary that helps us achieve compliance through monthly and sometimes weekly scanning. In terms of reporting, Acunetix is excellent because it can generate different types of reports, such as an executive summary report, detailed reports, and developer reports that can be shared directly with developers. Acunetix positively impacts my organization by helping identify outdated libraries and applications, including legacy applications vulnerable to old attacks based on OWASP Top 10, thus aiding in compliance checks for PCI DSS and OWASP. Acunetix provides a centralized report with compliance-related aspects and a vulnerability timeline, effectively helping reduce vulnerabilities and save time.
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise17
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code.
What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
I'm using Acunetix to automate security checks. Acunetix helped me catch common vulnerability issues early and improved the overall security posture of the application before development, specifica...
What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
I would advise anyone or any startup looking to engage in the security part to directly use Acunetix, as this will help in most aspects. I would rate this product a nine out of ten.
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...
 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. Checkmarx One and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.