Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan comparison

Checkmarx and Kiuwan are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Checkmarx is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.2, while Kiuwan is ranked #29. Checkmarx holds a 10.2% mindshare in AS, compared to Kiuwan’s 1.1% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of Kiuwan users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx One

Read 81 Checkmarx One reviews

17,957 Views
13,468 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Kiuwan

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

1,808 Views
1,464 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

Kiuwan

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Checkmarx One and Kiuwan are leading contenders in application security testing. Users indicate Checkmarx One holds an advantage in pricing and support satisfaction, while Kiuwan excels in feature offerings, making it appealing for feature-focused users.

Features: Checkmarx One excels in comprehensive security testing, seamless integration capabilities, and delivering detailed code analysis. Kiuwan is noted for providing intricate vulnerability reports, ease of configuration, and facilitating efficient remediation processes.

Room for Improvement: Checkmarx One could enhance performance speed, back-end robustness, and scanning optimization to deliver faster results. Kiuwan's documentation clarity, dashboard usability, and intuitive navigation could be improved for better user experience.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Checkmarx One offers simple deployment options but should focus on quicker support response times. Kiuwan is praised for its smooth deployment and responsive customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Checkmarx One's slightly higher setup costs are justified by its functionality. Kiuwan offers attractive pricing and ROI, due to its efficiency and lower initial costs, appealing to budget-conscious organizations.

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

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan

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

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

3rd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

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)

Kiuwan

Ranking in Application Security Tools

29th

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

25th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

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 Kiuwan is 1.1%, up from 1.0% 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%
Kiuwan	1.1%
Other	88.7%

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

Anshul Anshul

Sr. Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

Efficient and accurate scanning, and detailed analysis

In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further. Another issue I've encountered is that Kiuwan only looks at the version of components and doesn't take into account any workaround fixes that have been implemented at the code level. This can result in false positives being reported. Additionally, these issues are in the "insights" tab and not in the code base security aspect. Lastly, when muting findings that are false positives, there should be an option to see the only available at the code level rather than at the organization level because it can lead to missing vulnerabilities if they are muted at the org level. An additional feature that would be helpful is the ability to easily download reports from Kiuwan. Specifically, in the "insights" tab, we have been encountering an error when trying to download the PDF report. We are able to download the code-based security report, but not the insights report. This has been an ongoing issue for the past couple of months and would be beneficial if it could be resolved. My main recommendation would be to address the issues with downloading reports that we have been experiencing. Additionally, it would be helpful if Kiuwan could support a wider range of programming languages, as there are currently some that are not compatible with the tool. If the code of a particular application falls under the category which is not compatible with Kiuwan, then it will not be able to scan it.

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

"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."

"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 features are the easy to understand interface, and it 's very user-friendly."

"The features and technologies are very good. The flexibility and the roadmap have also been very good. They're at the forefront of delivering the additional capabilities that are required with cloud delivery, etc. Their ability to deliver what customers require and when they require is very important."

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

"Checkmarx One has definitely helped us to save time and reduce the need for additional security resources, meaning employees."

"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."

"I have seen a return on investment from Checkmarx One."

More Checkmarx One pros

"Lifecycle features, because they permit us to show non-technical people the risk and costs hidden into the code due to bad programming practices."

"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."

"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."

"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."

"The solution offers very good technical support."

"I find it immensely helpful because it's not just about generating code; it's about ensuring efficiency in the execution."

"The feature that I have found the most valuable in Kiuwan is the speed of scanning. Compared to other SaaS tools I have used, Kiuwan is much quicker in performing scans. I have not yet used it on a large code base, but from what I have experienced, it is efficient and accurate. Additionally, I have used it both manually and in an automated pipeline, and both methods have been effective. The speed of scanning is what makes it valuable to me."

"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"The plugins for the development environment have room for improvements such as for Android Studio and X code."

"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."

"One area for improvement in Checkmarx is pricing, as it's more expensive than other products."

"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."

"The solution's user interface could be improved because it seems outdated."

"Checkmarx could improve the speed of the scans."

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

"I can't create a business case with multiple-factor authentication."

More Checkmarx One cons

"The configuration hasn't been that good."

"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."

"In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further."

"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."

"The development-to-delivery phase."

"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."

"I would like to see better integration with the Visual Studio and Eclipse IDEs."

"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is an expensive solution."

"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."

"Before implementing the product I would evaluate if it is really necessary to scan so many different languages and frameworks. If not, I think there must be a cheaper solution for scanning Java-only applications (which are 90% of our applications)."

"We have purchased an annual license to use this solution. The price is reasonable."

"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."

"We have a subscription license that is on a yearly basis, and it's a pretty competitive solution."

"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."

"Checkmarx is comparatively costlier than other products, which is why some of the customers feel reluctant to go for it, though performance-wise, Checkmarx can compete with other products."

More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice

"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."

"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."

"Check with your account manager."

"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."

"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."

"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."

"This solution is cheaper 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.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

12%

University

11%

Financial Services Firm

Consumer Goods 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	16
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	6

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 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

OWASP Zap vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

More Checkmarx One Competitors

SonarQube vs Kiuwan

Compared 34% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 9% of the time

Snyk vs Kiuwan

Compared 7% of the time

GitHub vs Kiuwan

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Kiuwan

Compared 5% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One

January 2026

Download Checkmarx One product report

Buyer's Guide

Kiuwan

January 2026

Download Kiuwan 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

Software analytics technology with a breadth of third party integrations that takes into account the wealth of applications your teams are currently using.

We facilitate and encourage work between unlocalized teams. We understand the complexity of working on multi technology environments, constantly striving to increase the number of programming languages and technologies we support.

Kiuwan

Sample Customers

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

DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan

December 2025

Free Report: Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.