Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap comparison

Checkmarx and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Checkmarx is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1, while OWASP is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.0. Checkmarx holds a 9.2% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 2.9% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OWASP users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx One

Read 81 Checkmarx One reviews

24,219 Views
15,500 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

8,774 Views
8,072 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Checkmarx One and OWASP Zap compete in the software security category. Checkmarx One has an upper hand in terms of customer service and ease of deployment, while OWASP Zap is preferred for its feature set and cost-effectiveness.

Features: Checkmarx One offers comprehensive scanning capabilities, robust pricing, and integration options. OWASP Zap provides an extensive feature set, open-source flexibility, and strong customization possibilities.

Room for Improvement: Checkmarx One needs enhanced response times, better report generation, and more efficient support channels. OWASP Zap requires improved documentation, a streamlined setup process, and more user-friendly updates.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Checkmarx One is recognized for straightforward deployment and commendable customer service. OWASP Zap, while having a steeper learning curve, benefits from strong community support.

Pricing and ROI: Checkmarx One's high setup costs are offset by strong ROI through effective vulnerability identification. OWASP Zap's free nature gives it a clear advantage in initial costs, though expertise hiring can impact perceived ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx One vs. OWASP Zap Report (Updated: June 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. OWASP Zap

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 900,747 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 Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

2nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (2nd), Vulnerability Management (15th), Container Security (14th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (4th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (2nd)

OWASP Zap

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

14th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 9.2%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 2.9%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Checkmarx One	9.2%
OWASP Zap	2.9%
Other	87.9%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

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

Amit Beniwal

Project Manager at Al Hassan LLC

Simplifies vulnerability discovery and has high quality support

There are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores. Sometimes, a vulnerability initially categorized as high severity may be reduced to medium or low over time after security patches are applied. This alignment with the present severity score and CVSS score could be improved.

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 user interface is excellent. It's very user friendly."

"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."

"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."

"Apart from software scanning, software composition scanning is valuable."

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

"It has all the features we need."

"Checkmarx has helped us deliver more secure products. We are able to do static code analysis with the tool before shipping our code to production. When the integration is in the pipeline, this tool gives us early notifications on code fixes."

"We were using HPE Security Fortify to scan code for security vulnerabilities, but it can scan only after a successful compile, and if the code has dependencies or build errors the scan fails, while with Checkmarx pre-compile scanning is seamless and allows us to scan more code."

More Checkmarx One pros

"We use OWASP Zap for web application security scanning."

"The reporting is quite intuitive, which gives you a clear indication of what kind of vulnerability you have that you can drill down on to gather more information."

"ZAP is easy to use. The automated scan is a powerful feature. You can simulate attacks with various parameters. ZAP integrates well with SonarQube."

"OWASP Zap is straightforward to use. If someone doesn't have the budget for tools like Burp Suite, OWASP Zap is an excellent alternative."

"One valuable feature of OWASP Zap is that it is simple to use."

"If you're a company and you've got your own websites, internally and externally, it's great."

"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."

"The solution enables a person to add the certificate and check the queries, to see if there are any that are undefined, so a person can have a list of the types of queries and can trace them."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"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."

"They should make it more container-friendly and optimized for the CI pipeline. They should make it a little less heavy."

"When we have many applications to check, I need to wait a long time in the queue."

"Checkmarx needs to be more scalable for large enterprise companies."

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

"Checkmarx One can be improved by reducing noise and improving false positive filtering."

"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."

"They can support the remaining languages that are currently not supported."

More Checkmarx One cons

"The technical support team must be proactive."

"Deployment is somewhat complicated."

"Zap could improve by providing better reports for security and recommendations for the vulnerabilities."

"It would be a great improvement if they could include a marketplace to add extra features to the tool."

"The product reporting could be improved."

"There are too many false positives."

"As security evolves, we would like DevOps built into it. As of now, Zap does not provide this."

"It would be nice to have a solid SQL injection engine built into Zap."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is the right price for quality delivery."

"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."

"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."

"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."

"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're using a commercial version of Checkmarx, and we paid for the solution for one year. The price is high and could be reduced."

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

"The solution is costly."

More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice

"The tool is open source."

"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."

"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."

"It's free and open, currently under the Apache 2 license. If ZAP does what you need it to do, selling a free solution is a very easy."

"OWASP Zap is free to use."

"It's free. It's good for us because we don't know what the extent of our use will be yet. It's good to start with something free and easy to use."

"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."

"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."

More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

University

Manufacturing 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	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	22

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 is the biggest difference between Veracode and Checkmarx?

According to my experience of using both the tools in different organizations Veracode is a Cloud-native, managed AppSec platform with strong focus on ease of use, it is SaaS delivery, and provide...

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

Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?

OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OWASP Zap?

OWASP might be cost-effective, however, people prefer to use the free edition available as open source.

See all answers

What needs improvement with OWASP Zap?

The improvement that has to be done for APIs focuses on manual activities where the feature exists, but it is not at the same level as what Burp Suite does with intercepting and tools such as Postm...

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs Checkmarx One

Compared 32% of the time

Veracode vs Checkmarx One

Compared 3% of the time

Checkmarx SAST vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

Fortify Software Security Center vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

Fortify Application Defender vs Checkmarx One

Compared 1% of the time

More Checkmarx One Competitors

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap

Compared 11% of the time

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 10% of the time

SonarQube vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

Snyk vs OWASP Zap

Compared 5% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One

June 2026

Download Checkmarx One product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

June 2026

Download OWASP Zap product report

Overview

Checkmarx One delivers robust security through seamless integration with SCM and CI/CD tools, ensuring reliable SAST and SCA. Primarily used by organizations for vulnerability detection, it supports cloud and on-premises deployment to enhance secure coding practices.

Checkmarx One provides organizations with comprehensive tools for secure software development, integrating effectively with CI/CD pipelines to scan thousands of applications. Its capabilities extend to identifying vulnerabilities in both code bases and third-party software. Enhancing workflow by supporting SCM solutions, it assists in maintaining secure coding standards and compliance. While excelling in various areas, it requires improvements in scan speed, reduction of false positives, and broader platform integration, particularly for COBOL and Swift. Its pricing model is noted as high, and demand exists for better tutorials and documentation.

What are the key features of Checkmarx One?

Comprehensive Integration: Seamlessly connects with SCM, CI/CD tools to streamline security workflows.
Accurate SAST and SCA: Precisely identifies vulnerabilities down to the exact line of code.
Custom Rules Configuration: Allows tailored security measures to match specific needs.
Quick Scanning: Provides fast analysis to speed up the development process.
Automated Code Remediation: Helps in efficiently fixing code vulnerabilities.

What benefits should users expect in reviews?

Improved Security: Enhances code safety, reducing vulnerabilities efficiently.
Effective False Positivity Management: Optimizes time spent on genuine issues.
Enhanced Development Processes: Integrates smoothly to boost secure coding initiatives.
Comprehensive Language Support: Facilitates scanning in multiple programming languages, accommodating diverse needs.

Industries implement Checkmarx One for secure coding compliance and vulnerability management across varying environments, choosing between cloud and on-premises deployment based on requirements. Its extensive language support and integration with DevSecOps practices make it a popular choice for organizations aiming to enhance software security.

Checkmarx

OWASP Zap is a free and open-source web application security scanner.

The solution helps developers identify vulnerabilities in their web applications by actively scanning for common security issues.

With its user-friendly interface and powerful features, Zap is a popular choice among developers for ensuring the security of their web applications.

OWASP

Sample Customers

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

1. Google 2. Microsoft 3. IBM 4. Amazon 5. Facebook 6. Twitter 7. LinkedIn 8. Netflix 9. Adobe 10. PayPal 11. Salesforce 12. Cisco 13. Oracle 14. Intel 15. HP 16. Dell 17. VMware 18. Symantec 19. McAfee 20. Citrix 21. Red Hat 22. Juniper Networks 23. SAP 24. Accenture 25. Deloitte 26. Ernst & Young 27. PwC 28. KPMG 29. Capgemini 30. Infosys 31. Wipro 32. TCS

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. OWASP Zap

June 2026

Free Report: Checkmarx One vs. OWASP Zap

Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx One vs. OWASP Zap report.

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

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.