Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 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 Application Security Testing (SAST)
3rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Vulnerability Management (23rd), Container Security (23rd), Static Code Analysis (3rd), API Security (6th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th), DevSecOps (5th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd)
OWASP Zap
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
11th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.0%, down from 12.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 4.5%, up from 4.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Checkmarx One10.0%
OWASP Zap4.5%
Other85.5%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Syed Hasan - PeerSpot reviewer
Partner experiences excellent technical support and seamless initial setup
In my opinion, if we are able to extract or show the report, and because everything is going towards agent tech and GenAI, it would be beneficial if it could get integrated with our code base and do the fix automatically. It could suggest how the code base is written and automatically populate the source code with three different solution options to choose from. This would be really helpful.
Amit Beniwal - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Both automatic and manual code review (CxQL) are valuable."
"Overall, the ability to find vulnerabilities in the code is better than the tool that we were using before."
"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 improved the efficiency of our code security reviews. It helps tremendously because it finds hundreds of potential problems sometimes."
"Vulnerability details is valuable."
"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."
"The reports are very good because they include details on the code level, and make suggestions about how to fix the problems."
"The OWASP's tool is free of cost, which gives it a great advantage, especially for smaller companies to make use of the tool."
"One valuable feature of OWASP Zap is that it is simple to use."
"Fuzzer and Java APIs help a lot with our custom needs."
"It has evolved over the years and recently in the last year they have added, HUD (Heads Up Display)."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. I think it's stable enough. I don't see any crashes within the application, so its stability is high."
"The stability of the solution is very good."
"Automatic scanning is a valuable feature and very easy to use."
"We use the solution for security testing."
 

Cons

"In terms of dashboarding, the solution could provide a little more flexibility in terms of creating more dashboards. It has some of its own dashboards that come out of the box. However, if I have to implement my own dashboards that are aligned to my organization's requirements, that dashboarding feature has limited capability right now."
"Its pricing model can be improved. Sometimes, it is a little complex to understand its pricing model."
"Checkmarx needs improvement in its Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) and API security features."
"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
"The pricing can get a bit expensive, depending on the company's size."
"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."
"I would like to see the rate of false positives reduced."
"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."
"ZAP's integration with cloud-based CICD pipelines could be better. The scan should run through the entire pipeline."
"It would be beneficial to enhance the algorithm to provide better summaries of automatic scanning results."
"It would be a great improvement if they could include a marketplace to add extra features to the tool."
"OWASP Zap needs to extend to mobile application testing."
"The solution is somewhat unreliable because after we get the finding, we have to manually verify each of its findings to see whether it's a false positive or a true finding, and it takes time."
"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."
"The product reporting could be improved."
"There's very little documentation that comes with OWASP Zap."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is expensive."
"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."
"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."
"The license has a vague language around P1 issues and the associated support. Make sure to review these in order to align them with your organizational policies."
"It's relatively expensive."
"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."
"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."
"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."
"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 app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."
"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."
"The tool is open-source."
"OWASP Zap is free to use."
"This solution is open source and free."
"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."
"OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
868,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise38
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise21
 

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 do you like most about Checkmarx?
Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Checkmarx?
The pricing is relatively expensive due to the product's quality and performance, but it is worth it.
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 ...
What do you like most about OWASP Zap?
The best feature is the Zap HUD (Heads Up Display) because the customers can use the website normally. If we scan websites with automatic scanning, and the website has a web application firewall, i...
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.
 

Overview

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.