Checkmarx One vs Polaris Platform comparison

Checkmarx and Black Duck are both solutions in the Static Code Analysis category. Checkmarx is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.2, while Black Duck is ranked #19. Checkmarx holds a 10.8% mindshare in SCAS, compared to Black Duck’s 2.3% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution.

Checkmarx One

Read 81 Checkmarx One reviews

17,957 Views
2,155 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Polaris Platform

Read 1 Polaris Platform review

1,511 Views
212 Comparison Views

0% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

Polaris Platform

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 21, 2025

Checkmarx One and Polaris Platform compete in the application security landscape. Polaris Platform holds a slight edge due to its comprehensive features.

Features: Checkmarx One offers extensive code scanning capabilities, seamless integration into development processes, and robust threat detection. Polaris Platform features in-depth analytics, customizable security protocols, and specialized security analytics appealing to users prioritizing detailed insights.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Checkmarx One provides streamlined cloud-based deployment with strong customer support options, making setup simple. Polaris Platform's deployment is smooth, supported by an intuitive customer service framework, resulting in higher customer satisfaction.

Pricing and ROI: Checkmarx One presents a competitive setup cost with clear ROI focused on threat detection. Polaris Platform might involve higher initial investment but offers advanced features potentially leading to increased long-term savings.

To learn more, read our detailed Static Code Analysis Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Static Code Analysis

January 2026

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 Static Code Analysis

2nd

Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

2nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (3rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (16th), Container Security (15th), API Security (3rd), DevSecOps (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (8th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (2nd)

Polaris Platform

Ranking in Static Code Analysis

19th

Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

17th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

3.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (16th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Static Code Analysis category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.8%, down from 22.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polaris Platform is 2.3%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Code Analysis Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Checkmarx One	10.8%
Polaris Platform	2.3%
Other	86.9%

Static Code Analysis

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

Alina-Eugenia Negulescu

Head of Procurement and Vendor Manger at twoday

Company consistently identifies security vulnerabilities with current solution but considers moving to a more developer-oriented tool due to complexity and costs

I wouldn't recommend it for small and medium customers, both in terms of the complexity and organizational processes and operational processes around it. I wouldn't go with Black Duck. It's not straightforward as it is with more developer-oriented and plug-and-play versions, so it requires a bit of knowledge and documentation to set it up. On the support part, in the past, we had some issues regarding the availability of the information on the knowledge portal. That was particularly due to the fact that when they integrated their knowledge hub or knowledge portal different kind of documentation, they have not adapted the text. There were circular references on the documentation that was misleading and confusing our people rather than helping them.

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

"One of the most valuable features is it is flexible."

"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."

"It allows for SAST scanning of uncompiled code. Further, it natively integrates with all key repos formats (Git, TFS, SVN, Perforce, etc)."

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

"The best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."

"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."

"Overall, I use Checkmarx One as a strategic control point to improve developer velocity while strengthening application security across the full software lifecycle."

"What I like best about Checkmarx is that it has fewer false positives than other products, giving you better results."

More Checkmarx One pros

"We have detected security vulnerabilities, which is absolutely one big benefit."

Cons

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

"The reports are good, but they still need to be improved considering what the UI offers."

"Checkmarx could be improved with more integration with third-party software."

"The interactive application security testing, or IAST, the interactive part where you're looking at an application that lives in a runtime environment on a server or virtual machine, needs improvement."

"Checkmarx One can be improved on the side of faster scans, especially when our CI pipelines are scanning for vulnerabilities."

"Meta data is always needed."

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

"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."

More Checkmarx One cons

"I wouldn't recommend it for small and medium customers, both in terms of the complexity and organizational processes and operational processes around it."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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)."

"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."

"It is a good product but a little overpriced."

"The pricing is competitive and provides a lower TCO (total cost of ownership) for achieving application security."

"We got a special offer for a 30% reduction for three years, after our first year. I think for a real source-code scanning tool, you have to add a lot of money for Open Source Analysis, and AppSec Coach (160 Euro per user per year)."

"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."

"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

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Code Analysis 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

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	32
Midsize Enterprise	9
Large Enterprise	46

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.

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 Polaris Platform

Compared 25% of the time

Black Duck SCA vs Polaris Platform

Compared 16% of the time

Coverity Static vs Polaris Platform

Compared 14% of the time

Software Risk Manager ASPM vs Polaris Platform

Compared 7% of the time

Mend.io vs Polaris Platform

Compared 5% of the time

More Polaris Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One

January 2026

Download Checkmarx One product report

Buyer's Guide

Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

January 2026

Download Polaris Platform 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

Polaris Platform is a cloud-native application security testing solution tailored for modern development and DevSecOps teams, integrating multiple security-analysis engines to enhance software security.

As a unified platform, Polaris consolidates static code analysis, open-source dependency scanning, and dynamic testing, offering comprehensive security assessments suited to different stages of the software development lifecycle. This approach allows for strategic, flexible security testing that aligns with specific project or application needs, seamlessly integrating into existing workflows without requiring generic scans.

What are the key features of Polaris Platform?

Static Code Analysis: Efficiently detects security vulnerabilities in the source code.
Open-source Dependency Scanning: Identifies and manages risks associated with third-party libraries.
Dynamic Testing: Simulates real-world attacks to evaluate application security in active environments.
Integrated Platform: Combines various security tools for a streamlined testing process.

What benefits should users expect from using Polaris Platform?

Enhanced Security Insight: Provides detailed, actionable reports on potential vulnerabilities.
Seamless Integration: Fits smoothly into existing development workflows, minimizing disruption.
Flexibility: Allows tailored security assessments according to project phases or requirements.

Polaris Platform implementation varies across industries, with tech companies utilizing it for securing app ecosystems, while financial sectors leverage its comprehensive testing to protect sensitive data. Healthcare providers adopt it to ensure compliance with regulations and maintain data integrity.

Black Duck

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 Veracode, Checkmarx, Perforce and others in Static Code Analysis. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Static Code Analysis vendors and best Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Code Analysis 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.