No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan Insights comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 2024

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 Static Code Analysis
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Vulnerability Management (16th), Container Security (15th), API Security (4th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (1st)
Kiuwan Insights
Ranking in Static Code Analysis
24th
Average Rating
4.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Static Code Analysis category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 9.6%, down from 18.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan Insights is 1.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Code Analysis Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One9.6%
Kiuwan Insights1.6%
Other88.8%
Static Code Analysis
 

Featured Reviews

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.
FE
Head of Development and Consulting at Logalty
Protects problematic libraries; sorely lacking in customer services
Kiuwan lacks decent support, it's very bad. A couple of years ago an American company bought Kiuwan and support became non-existent. It's a big part of why we're looking to move to another product. We have questions regarding false positives and nobody responds to our tickets. They don't have any answers. If you're looking for a cheaper solution and don't require support, it might be okay, but a large end company that has a lot of questions about how the developers are programming will have trouble.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 consistency of code showed our team where they are inconsistent or where they have made simple omissions."
"We have been using this product extensively for a lot of applications to identify as well as employ proper remediation which makes the application secure including information issues which might get neglected with a manual code review process."
"As an InfoSec consulting company, we come across major challenging projects, and Checkmarx has made life easy by reducing manual efforts in using test cases against any vulnerability found during source code reviews while intelligently finding the latest vulnerabilities beyond the OWASP Top Ten."
"The main benefit to using this solution is that we find vulnerabilities in our software before the development cycle is complete."
"By using the automated testing in Checkmarx One, we have saved around one or two days in a full week of our team because we have a lot of code to do with seven markets."
"Both automatic and manual code review (CxQL) are valuable."
"Vulnerability details is valuable."
"I have found the interface to be perfect."
"Insights is valuable at protecting a problematic library and enabling you to reduce the number of false positives."
"I have found the interface to be perfect."
"Can help in reducing the number of false positives."
 

Cons

"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."
"There is nothing particular that I don't like in this solution. It can have more integrations, but the integrations that we would like are in the roadmap anyway, and they just need to deliver the roadmap. What I like about the roadmap is that it is going where it needs to go. If I were to look at the roadmap, there is nothing that is jumping out there that says to me, "Yeah. I'd like something else on the roadmap." What they're looking to deliver is what I would expect and forecast them to deliver."
"We had to lock the number of CPUs used to not crash the Checkmarx Audit."
"Its user interface could be improved and made more friendly."
"Checkmarx One can be improved on the side of faster scans, especially when our CI pipelines are scanning for vulnerabilities."
"The reports are good, but they still need to be improved considering what the UI offers."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The solution is great, but improvement is needed in the number of lines of code allowed, that is the capacity. Pricing can be improved as well."
"Kiuwan lacks decent support, it's very bad. A couple of years ago an American company bought Kiuwan and support became non-existent."
"The solution has issues detecting intrusive methods."
"The solution is great, but improvement is needed in the number of lines of code allowed, that is the capacity. Pricing can be improved as well."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is the right price for quality delivery."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"The average deal size was usually anywhere between $120K to $175K on an annual basis, which could be divided across 12 months."
"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."
"The tool's pricing is fine."
"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."
"The pricing is competitive and provides a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) for achieving application security."
"It is a good product but a little overpriced."
"Pricing can be improved as well."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Code Analysis solutions are best for your needs.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
No data available
 

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.
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...
What needs improvement with Checkmarx?
One way Checkmarx One could be improved is if it could automatically run scans every month after implementation. If it is possible to set it in the SAST portal to scan the repositories automaticall...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Insights SCA
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Kiuwan Insights and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.