Checkmarx One vs CodeSonar comparison

Checkmarx and CodeSecure are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Checkmarx is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.2, while CodeSecure is ranked #28. Checkmarx holds a 9.9% mindshare in AS, compared to CodeSecure’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of CodeSecure users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx One

Read 81 Checkmarx One reviews

18,489 Views
13,497 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

CodeSonar

Read 7 CodeSonar reviews

2,674 Views
1,845 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

CodeSonar

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Checkmarx One and CodeSonar are widely used in the security software market. CodeSonar takes the lead due to its robust features and effectiveness, making it a preferred choice for users seeking comprehensive analysis.

Features: Checkmarx One integrates seamlessly with other tools, offers competitive pricing, and provides strong customer support. CodeSonar boasts comprehensive analysis, high detection accuracy, and the ability to identify deep-seated vulnerabilities.

Room for Improvement: Checkmarx One needs to enhance speed and performance for larger projects, refine its feature set for detailed analysis, and improve customer service response. CodeSonar could benefit from a more intuitive reporting dashboard, optimize its deployment complexity, and enhance certain user interface aspects.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Checkmarx One is easy to deploy with mixed customer service responsiveness. CodeSonar's deployment is more complex, but reliable support helps facilitate the process and mitigates any difficulties.

Pricing and ROI: Checkmarx One offers cost-effectiveness for tight budgets, providing quick ROI. CodeSonar, though more expensive, justifies its cost with long-term security benefits and substantial risk reduction, delivering value over a longer period.

To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx One vs. CodeSonar Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. CodeSonar

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,707 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 Application Security Tools

2nd

Ranking in Static Code Analysis

2nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (17th), Container Security (15th), API Security (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (7th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (2nd)

CodeSonar

Ranking in Application Security Tools

28th

Ranking in Static Code Analysis

10th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 9.9%, down from 11.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CodeSonar is 1.2%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Checkmarx One	9.9%
CodeSonar	1.2%
Other	88.9%

Application Security Tools

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

Mathieu ALBRESPY

Intigration Developer at ez-Wheel

Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand

This is the first time I've used this kind of software. It was the only one we could apply to analyze with MISRA rules. At my new company, I tried to use Klocwork. I tried to use it, just once so I cannot compare it exactly with CodeSonar. I also have a plugin for my Visual Studio and I try to make it work. It's not easy, however, I don't think that we have this kind of functionality with CodeSonar. It can do some incremental analysis. However, since this feature is also available on CodeSonar, it would be a good idea to have a plugin on Visual Studio just to have a quick analysis.

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 reports are very good because they include details on the code level, and make suggestions about how to fix the problems."

"The user interface is modern and nice to use."

"The only thing I like is that Checkmarx does not need to compile."

"It is very useful because it fits our requirements. It is also easy to use. It is not complex, and we are satisfied with the results."

"Once you implement Checkmarx One, you can be sure that you're getting value from the solution almost immediately because Checkmarx One also handles false positives very effectively, saving you time and saving your developers time."

"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are its integration with multiple SCM solutions and CICD tools, its ability to scale according to user licenses, and the quick scanning process."

"The most valuable feature of Checkmarx is the user interface, it is very easy to use. We do not need to configure anything, we only have to scan to see the results."

"The solution is always updating to continuously add items that create a level of safety from vulnerabilities. It's one of the key features they provide that's an excellent selling point. They're always ahead of the game when it comes to finding any vulnerabilities within the database."

More Checkmarx One pros

"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."

"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."

"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."

"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."

"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."

"It has been able to scale."

"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."

Cons

"You can't use it in the continuous delivery pipeline because the scanning takes too much time."

"I would like to see the DAST solution in the future."

"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."

"The tool is currently quite static in terms of finding security vulnerabilities. It would be great if it was more dynamic and we had even more tools at our disposal to keep us safe. It would help if there was more scanning or if the process was more automated."

"They should make it more container-friendly and optimized for the CI pipeline. They should make it a little less heavy. Right now, it requires a SQL database, and the way the tool works is that it has an engine and then it has an analysis database in which it stores the information. So, it is pretty heavy from that perspective because you have to have a full SQL Server. They're working on something called Checkmarx Light, which is a slim-down version. They haven't released it yet, but that's what we need. There should be something a little more slimmed down that can just run the analysis and output the results in a format that's readable as opposed to having a full, really big, and thick deployment with a full database server."

"Integration into the SDLC (i.e. support for last version of SonarQube) could be added."

"It is an expensive solution."

"Checkmarx One can be improved on the side of faster scans, especially when our CI pipelines are scanning for vulnerabilities."

More Checkmarx One cons

"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."

"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."

"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."

"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."

"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."

"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."

"It was expensive."

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."

"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."

"It is an expensive solution."

"The average deal size was usually anywhere between $120K to $175K on an annual basis, which could be divided across 12 months."

"It is the right price for quality delivery."

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

"The number of users and coverage for languages will have an impact on the cost of the license."

More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice

"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."

"The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools."

"The solution's price depends on the number of licenses needed and the source code for the project."

"Pricing is a bit costly."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Manufacturing Company

25%

University

11%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

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	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	2

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 do you like most about Checkmarx?

Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%.

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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

SonarQube vs Checkmarx One

Compared 47% of the time

Veracode vs Checkmarx One

Compared 4% of the time

Checkmarx SAST vs Checkmarx One

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Checkmarx One

Compared 3% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

More Checkmarx One Competitors

SonarQube vs CodeSonar

Compared 30% of the time

Coverity Static vs CodeSonar

Compared 20% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs CodeSonar

Compared 7% of the time

Helix QAC vs CodeSonar

Compared 5% of the time

Digital.ai Application Security vs CodeSonar

Compared 3% of the time

More CodeSonar Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One

February 2026

Download Checkmarx One product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

February 2026

Download CodeSonar product report

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

GrammaTech enables organizations to develop software applications more efficiently, on-budget, and on-schedule by helping to eliminate harmful defects that can cause system failures, enable data breaches, and ultimately increase corporate liabilities in today’s connected world. GrammaTech is the developer of CodeSonar, the most powerful source and binary code analysis solution available today. Extraordinarily precise, CodeSonar finds, on average, 2 times more serious defects in software than other static analysis solutions. Designed for organizations with zero tolerance for defects and vulnerabilities in their applications, CodeSonar provides static analysis for applications where reliability and security are paramount - widely used by software developers in avionics, medical, automotive, industrial control, and other mission-critical applications. Some of GrammaTech's customers include Toyota, GE, Hyundai, Kawasaki, LG, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Northrop Grumman, Panasonic, and Samsung.

CodeSecure

Sample Customers

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

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. CodeSonar

January 2026

Free Report: Checkmarx One vs. CodeSonar

Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. CodeSonar and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx One vs. CodeSonar report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Code Analysis vendors.

We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.