Checkmarx One vs Fortify Application Defender comparison

Checkmarx and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Checkmarx is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.2, while OpenText is ranked #24 with an average rating of 8.0. Checkmarx holds a 10.2% mindshare in AS, compared to OpenText’s 1.1% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 81% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx One

Read 81 Checkmarx One reviews

17,957 Views
13,468 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Fortify Application Defender

Read 11 Fortify Application Defender reviews

1,378 Views
1,116 Comparison Views

81% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

Fortify Application Defender

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Checkmarx One and Fortify Application Defender are two competitive solutions in the application security sector. Fortify has an edge with its comprehensive features and advanced analytics, making it a worthwhile investment for users prioritizing in-depth security.

Features: Checkmarx One is known for its integration capabilities, automated scanning, and early vulnerability detection. Fortify Application Defender offers real-time threat protection, robust analytics, and detailed insights into potential vulnerabilities.

Room for Improvement: Checkmarx One users suggest reporting enhancements, better customization options, and a less steep learning curve. Fortify Application Defender could improve its initial setup process, scalability, and onboarding experience.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Checkmarx One is recognized for smooth deployment and responsive customer service, with exceptional support. Fortify’s deployment is complex but reliable once operational, with effective support.

Pricing and ROI: Checkmarx One offers competitive pricing, leading to good ROI. Though Fortify Application Defender is costlier, it delivers ROI through advanced features and long-term efficiency. Users find Checkmarx more budget-friendly; Fortify attracts with potential security advancements.

To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx One vs. Fortify Application Defender Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. Fortify Application Defender

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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

3rd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (16th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (8th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (2nd)

Fortify Application Defender

Ranking in Application Security Tools

24th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.2%, down from 11.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortify Application Defender is 1.1%, up from 0.7% 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	10.2%
Fortify Application Defender	1.1%
Other	88.7%

Application Security Tools

Q&A Highlights

Shiva

Works at a cloud solution provider with 201-500 employees

Dec 17, 2019

What is the Biggest Difference Between Checkmarx and Fortify?

Checkmarx SAST is a product supporting 20+ languages, including the modern ones (GoLang, Kotlin, Swift, Scala, Typescript, React). Its language support is constantly kept up with the current versions of the respective languages/frameworks (e.g. .NET Core 2.x etc.). Unlike Fortify, Checkmarx analyses raw (uncompiled) source code, which makes it less susceptible to changes in the built environment (e.g. no dependency on the specific version of XCode). Finally, the Checkmarx solution is available both as an on-premise and in the cloud (hosted) solution with the same capabilities. Fortify on demand (which is the cloud-only solution) is different from the on-prem one.

See all answers

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

VinothSivam

CTO at Abcl

Useful for fast code review in devOps pipelines

I rate the tool's scalability a seven out of ten. However, I'm concerned about how it handles an increasing number of lines of code. As the complexity grows, so does the time it takes for the tool to review everything. I want more clarity on how Fortify Application Defender handles multiple threats. We have numerous endpoints, but the tool runs in our pipeline, meaning it operates in the cloud. All our code is configured there, and the tool runs integration testing, unit testing, user testing, and final production code tests. It's a day-to-day experience. It's utilized almost every day as part of our pipeline runs. Each team responsible for integration testing, human testing, user access testing, and preproduction testing runs it whenever they take a build.

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 product's most valuable feature is static code and supply chain effect analysis. It provides a lot of visibility."

"The best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."

"The feature that I have found most valuable is that its number of false positives is less than the other security application platforms. Its ease of use is another good feature. It also supports most of the languages."

"Most valuable features include: ease of use, dashboard. interface and the ability to report."

"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."

"The most valuable feature is that it actually identifies the different criteria you can set to meet whatever standards you're trying to get your system accredited for."

"The most valuable feature for me is the Jenkins Plugin."

"The tool's valuable features include integrating GPT and Copilot. Additionally, the UI web representation is very user-friendly, making navigation easy. GPT has made several improvements to my security code."

More Checkmarx One pros

"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."

"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."

"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."

"The tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."

"We are able to provide out customers with a secure application after development. They are no longer left wondering if they are vulnerable to different threats within the market following deployment."

"I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy."

"The product saves us cost and time."

More Fortify Application Defender pros

Cons

"Some were valid and some were not applicable for us based on the scenario."

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

"Checkmarx being Windows only is a hindrance. Another problem is: why can't I choose PostgreSQL?"

"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."

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

"Checkmarx One is often down when the cloud provider experiences issues. A more fail-tolerant solution needs to be created."

"The cost per user is high and should be reduced."

"The validation process needs to be sped up."

More Checkmarx One cons

"The solution could improve the time it takes to scan. When comparing it to SonarQube it does it in minutes while in Fortify Application Defender it can take hours."

"The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and security checks. Many independent and open-source tools are available, from Apache to various libraries. Using multiple DevOps pipeline tools can slow the turnaround time."

"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."

"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."

"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."

"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."

"The false positive rate should be lower."

"The solution is quite expensive."

More Fortify Application Defender cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."

"The pricing is competitive and provides a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) for achieving application security."

"The solution is costly."

"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."

"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."

"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 not expensive, but sometimes, their pricing model or licensing model is not very clear. There are similar variables, such as projects or developers, and sometimes, it is a little bit confusing."

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

More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice

"The licensing is very complex, it's project based and can range from $10,000 to $200,000+ depending on the project type and size."

"Fortify Application Defender is very expensive."

"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten. It comes as an annual cloud subscription. The tool's pricing is around 50 lakhs."

"The price of this solution could be less expensive."

"The base licensing costs for the SaaS platform is about $900 USD per application, per year."

"The product’s price is much higher than other tools."

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

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Answers from the Community

Shiva

Works at a cloud solution provider with 201-500 employees

Dec 17, 2019

What is the Biggest Difference Between Checkmarx and Fortify?

2 out of 5 answers

it_user1181481

Solving Acute Engineering Problems at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Dec 16, 2019

The major difference is that Checkmarx scans the code without compiling the code. This has a great advantage as code building issues are eliminated, scan time is very less and false positive is less to some extent. One more major this is Checkmarx learns as you eliminate false positives and does not show the same issue again. We can perform incremental scans on the codebase where the old issue is nicely marked as "Recurring" and new ones in Red as NEW. Checkmarx has a highly customizable filter creation where you can create a filter that can eliminate the common recurring issues in scans. This feature is very flexible and you can write your own filters and also, write specific patterns that are found in manual review which is a great help as coding styles differ form teams to teams.

Read full answer

it_user1242723

Company Owner at BCMC

Dec 16, 2019

Looking at the Gartner report I would say that Checkmarx is way easier to set up (initial setup) compared to Micro Focus Fortify. Also, the financial strength of the Micro Focus Fortify spin/merger is a concern so investments could be at risk.

Read full answer

See all 5 answers

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Government

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	3
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	8

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

What do you like most about Fortify Application Defender?

I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Fortify Application Defender?

The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Fortify Application Defender?

We use the solution for fast code review. It is integrated into our DevOps pipeline.

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs Checkmarx One

Compared 48% of the time

Veracode vs Checkmarx One

Compared 5% 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

HCL AppScan vs Checkmarx One

Compared 1% of the time

More Checkmarx One Competitors

SonarQube vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 10% of the time

Coverity Static vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 7% of the time

CAST Application Intelligence Platform vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 5% of the time

Klocwork vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 5% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 5% of the time

More Fortify Application Defender Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One

January 2026

Download Checkmarx One product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

January 2026

Download Fortify Application Defender product report

Also Known As

No data available

HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender

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

Micro Focus Security Fortify Application Defender is a runtime application self-protection (RASP) solution that helps you manage and mitigate risk from homegrown or third-party applications. It provides centralized visibility into application use and abuse while protecting from software vulnerability exploits and other violations in real time.

OpenText

Sample Customers

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

ServiceMaster, Saltworks, SAP

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. Fortify Application Defender

December 2025

Free Report: Checkmarx One vs. Fortify Application Defender

Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Fortify Application Defender and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx One vs. Fortify Application Defender report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.