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

Cequence Security vs Checkmarx One comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Cequence Security
Ranking in Application Security Tools
20th
Ranking in API Security
4th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Bot Management (7th)
Checkmarx One
Ranking in Application Security Tools
3rd
Ranking in API Security
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (23rd), Container Security (23rd), Static Code Analysis (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th), DevSecOps (5th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Cequence Security is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.4%, down from 13.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Checkmarx One10.4%
Cequence Security0.3%
Other89.3%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2395431 - PeerSpot reviewer
Detect and mitigate attacks with API protection
Compliance with standards like those in Europe often requires ensuring that APIs adhere to OAuth and other security protocols. Many organizations need to verify that their APIs meet these compliance requirements. We can include information about where an API was first recorded and create a detailed chart. Some competitors already offer this feature. It is simple to integrate. Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.
Syed Hasan - PeerSpot reviewer
Partner experiences excellent technical support and seamless initial setup
In my opinion, if we are able to extract or show the report, and because everything is going towards agent tech and GenAI, it would be beneficial if it could get integrated with our code base and do the fix automatically. It could suggest how the code base is written and automatically populate the source code with three different solution options to choose from. This would be really helpful.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It uses machine learning algorithms to detect attacks and manage API inventory."
"The solution is scalable, but other solutions are better."
"The identification of verification-related security vulnerabilities is really important and one of the key things. It also identifies vulnerabilities for any kind of third-party tool coming into the system or any third-party tools that you are using, which is very useful for avoiding random hacking."
"The product's most valuable feature is static code and supply chain effect analysis. It provides a lot of visibility."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"I have seen a return on investment from Checkmarx One."
"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."
"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."
"The report function is the solution's greatest asset."
 

Cons

"It is expensive."
"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"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."
"Licensing models and Swift language support are the aspects in which this product needs to improve. Swift is a new language, in which major customers require support for lower prices."
"I think the CxAudit tool has room for improvement. At the beginning you can choose a scan of a project, but in any event the project must be scanned again (wasting time)."
"As the solution becomes more complex and feature rich, it takes more time to debug and resolve problems. Feature-wise, we have no complaints, but Checkmarx becomes harder to maintain as the product becomes more complex. When I talk to support, it takes them longer to fix the problem than it used to."
"With Checkmarx, normally you need to use one tool for quality and you need to use another tool for security. I understand that Checkmarx is not in the parity space because it's totally different, but they could include some free features or recommendations too."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it seems outdated."
"The product can be improved by continuing to expand the application languages and frameworks that can be scanned for vulnerabilities. This includes expanded coverage for mobile applications as well as open-source development tools."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"The pricing is competitive and provides a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) for achieving application security."
"The solution is costly."
"Most of my customers opted for a perpetual license. They prefer to pay the highest amount up front for the perpetual license and then pay for additional support annually."
"The tool's pricing is fine."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
"​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 number of users and coverage for languages will have an impact on the cost of the license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
7%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise38
 

Questions from the Community

What is your primary use case for Cequence Security?
We use the solution to detect and mitigate attacks. It helps prevent them while also protecting APIs and effectively managing API inventory.
What advice do you have for others considering Cequence Security?
Compliance with standards like those in Europe often requires ensuring that APIs adhere to OAuth and other security protocols. Many organizations need to verify that their APIs meet these complianc...
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?
The pricing is relatively expensive due to the product's quality and performance, but it is worth it.
 

Also Known As

Cequence ASP, Cequence Unified API Protection Platform
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

T-Mobile, Lbrands, Ulta Beauty
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 Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: September 2025.
868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.