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

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap comparison

Checkmarx and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Checkmarx is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.2, while OWASP is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.2. Checkmarx holds a 10.4% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 3.4% 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
  • 18,784 Views
  • 14,276 Comparison Views
88% willing to recommend
OWASP Zap
Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews
  • 7,440 Views
  • 6,845 Comparison Views
88% willing to recommend
 

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.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx One vs. OWASP Zap Report (Updated: March 2026).
Buyer's Guide
Checkmarx One vs. OWASP Zap
March 2026
Download the complete report
Helped 884,873 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)
3rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Vulnerability Management (17th), 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)
OWASP Zap
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
9th
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 March 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.4%, down from 11.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 3.4%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One10.4%
OWASP Zap3.4%
Other86.2%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Shahzad Shahzad - PeerSpot reviewer
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
NK
Nithin-K
Technical Analyst at Hexaware Technologies Limited
Open source testing tool empowers manual activities and has room to improve integration and reporting features
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 Postman, so it needs improvement. There are limitations with authentication levels, particularly with form-based and cookie-based authentication. However, overall, we are satisfied with OWASP Zap as there are no major issues, and improving the scan engine could be beneficial. When comparing OWASP Zap and Burp Suite, the main difference besides pricing is that OWASP Zap has limitations with reporting levels and UI, which affects its reporting capabilities, whereas Burp Suite is already advancing with new AI features and scanning capabilities that OWASP Zap seems to be lacking.
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 process of remediating software security vulnerabilities can now be performed (ongoing) as portions of the application are being built in advance of being compiled."
"Scan reviews can occur during the development lifecycle."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are difficult to pinpoint because of the way the functionalities and the features are intertwined, it's difficult to say which part of them I prefer most. You initiate the scan, you have a scan, you have the review set, and reporting, they all work together as one whole process. It's not like accounting software, where you have the different features, et cetera."
"The main advantage of this solution is its centralized reporting functionality, which lets us track issues, then see and report on the priorities via a web portal."
"It provides a graphical view of any vulnerabilities."
"The only thing I like is that Checkmarx does not need to compile."
"Checkmarx One has positively impacted the organization, and since replacing the previous tool, SAST and SCA scans are conducted in a couple of minutes instead of hours or days, saving time and increasing speed to market by reducing the timeline from three or four days to one day only."
"The UI is user-friendly."
More Checkmarx One pros
"The stability of the solution is very good."
"The scalability of this product is very good."
"The API is exceptional."
"The product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."
"I consider OWASP Zap to be the most effective solution overall; being open source allows integration with other systems via OWASP Zap APIs."
"Automatic updates and pull request analysis."
"Two features are valuable. The first one is that the scan gets completed really quickly, and the second one is that even though it searches in a limited scope, what it does in that limited scope is very good. When you use Zap for testing, you're only using it for specific aspects or you're only looking for certain things. It works very well in that limited scope."
"The solution is scalable."
More OWASP Zap pros
 

Cons

"They can support the remaining languages that are currently not supported. They can also create a different model that can identify zero-day attacks. They can work on different patterns to identify and detect zero-day vulnerability attacks."
"They should make it more container-friendly and optimized for the CI pipeline. They should make it a little less heavy. Right now, it requires a SQL database, and the way the tool works is that it has an engine and then it has an analysis database in which it stores the information. So, it is pretty heavy from that perspective because you have to have a full SQL Server. They're working on something called Checkmarx Light, which is a slim-down version. They haven't released it yet, but that's what we need. There should be something a little more slimmed down that can just run the analysis and output the results in a format that's readable as opposed to having a full, really big, and thick deployment with a full database server."
"Checkmarx needs to be more scalable for large enterprise companies."
"As the solution becomes more complex and feature rich, it takes more time to debug and resolve problems. Feature-wise, we have no complaints, but Checkmarx becomes harder to maintain as the product becomes more complex. When I talk to support, it takes them longer to fix the problem than it used to."
"The cost per user is high and should be reduced."
"The validation process needs to be sped up."
"I think the CxAudit tool has room for improvement. At the beginning you can choose a scan of a project, but in any event the project must be scanned again (wasting time)."
"If it is a very large code base then we have a problem where we cannot scan it."
More Checkmarx One cons
"Lacks resources where users can internally access a learning module from the tool."
"The product should allow users to customize the report based on their needs."
"It needs more robust reporting tools."
"I'd like to see a kind of feature where we can just track what our last vulnerability was and how it has improved or not. More reports that can have some kind of base-lining, I think that would be a good feature too. I'm not sure whether it can be achieved and implement but I think that would really help."
"Reporting format has no output, is cluttered and very long."
"There isn't too much information about it online."
"Online documentation can be improved to utilize all features of ZAP and API methods to make use in automation."
"OWASP should work on reducing false positives by using AI and ML algorithms."
More OWASP Zap cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
"It is an expensive solution."
"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."
"The number of users and coverage for languages will have an impact on the cost of the license."
"The tool's pricing is fine."
"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."
"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice
"This solution is open source and free."
"The tool is open source."
"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."
"The solution’s pricing is high."
"It is open source, and we can scan freely."
"OWASP Zap is free to use."
"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."
"The tool is open-source."
More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice
report
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
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
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.
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 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...
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 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...
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
 

Comparisons

SonarQube vs Checkmarx One Logo
SonarQube vs Checkmarx One
Compared 44% of the time
Veracode vs Checkmarx One Logo
Veracode vs Checkmarx One
Compared 4% of the time
Checkmarx SAST vs Checkmarx One Logo
Checkmarx SAST vs Checkmarx One
Compared 3% of the time
OpenText Core Application Security vs Checkmarx One Logo
OpenText Core Application Security vs Checkmarx One
Compared 3% of the time
GitHub Advanced Security vs Checkmarx One Logo
GitHub Advanced Security vs Checkmarx One
Compared 2% of the time
More Checkmarx One Competitors
Acunetix vs OWASP Zap Logo
Acunetix vs OWASP Zap
Compared 13% of the time
SonarQube vs OWASP Zap Logo
SonarQube vs OWASP Zap
Compared 12% of the time
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap Logo
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap
Compared 8% of the time
Veracode vs OWASP Zap Logo
Veracode vs OWASP Zap
Compared 8% of the time
Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap Logo
Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap
Compared 6% of the time
More OWASP Zap Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Checkmarx One
March 2026
Checkmarx One reportDownload Checkmarx One product report
Buyer's Guide
OWASP Zap
March 2026
OWASP Zap reportDownload OWASP Zap 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

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
March 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: March 2026.
DOWNLOAD NOW
884,873 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.