Checkmarx One vs Polyspace Code Prover comparison

Checkmarx and MathWorks are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Checkmarx is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1, while MathWorks is ranked #27 with an average rating of 6.5. Checkmarx holds a 8.3% mindshare in AS, compared to MathWorks’s 1.3% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 85% of MathWorks users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx One

Read 81 Checkmarx One reviews

24,219 Views
14,774 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Polyspace Code Prover

Read 7 Polyspace Code Prover reviews

3,112 Views
2,427 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

Checkmarx One

Polyspace Code Prover

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Checkmarx One and Polyspace Code Prover deliver robust solutions for software security and verification. Polyspace Code Prover slightly edges out in advanced static code analysis, though Checkmarx One is favored for affordability and support services.

Features: Checkmarx One integrates well and offers comprehensive security scanning, advantageous for DevOps teams. Polyspace Code Prover excels in sophisticated static analysis and proving code correctness without execution while also providing precise identification of coding flaws.

Room for Improvement: Checkmarx One could enhance its scanning speed and the navigation intuitiveness of its tools. Polyspace Code Prover could improve scalability and parallel processing capabilities. Checkmarx needs quicker scanning, contrasting with Polyspace's scalability needs.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Checkmarx One ensures straightforward deployment and reliable customer service, aiding smoother integration. Polyspace Code Prover demands more setup time, but offers responsive and knowledgeable support. Checkmarx offers seamless initial experiences, while Polyspace requires significant setup effort but maintains high support quality.

Pricing and ROI: Checkmarx One is seen as budget-friendly, offering better pricing options for users seeking value. Polyspace Code Prover’s advanced features justify its higher setup costs, delivering long-term cost-effectiveness for thorough code analysis.

To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx One vs. Polyspace Code Prover Report (Updated: June 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. Polyspace Code Prover

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 900,644 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 Application Security Tools

2nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (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)

Polyspace Code Prover

Ranking in Application Security Tools

27th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

2.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 8.3%, down from 10.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polyspace Code Prover is 1.3%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Checkmarx One	8.3%
Polyspace Code Prover	1.3%
Other	90.4%

Application Security Tools

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

reviewer2760282

General Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Has struggled with performance and integration but supports critical safety verification

Execution speed of the tests and generally the integration into AWS-driven CI work chains or workflows represent how it can be improved in my opinion. Performance issues plus license costs are two main driving factors. The CI environments that we use employ up to around 40,000 virtual CPUs per day in peak, running at the same time. We always have problems distributing licenses accordingly with other products. I can talk to the experts doing the integration, but as far as I know, I was involved with Polyspace Code Prover and we had a lot of difficulties integrating it into our Bazel-driven CI toolchain, plus integrating it on the AWS environments in Linux that we use. It was much more straightforward using Code Sonar there. The reason is the execution speed, integration with Azure and stuff, and pricing. The CI integration and maybe a better-suited license model for CI-driven execution are other areas I recommend improving. That's something we discussed with all of the software companies whose products we use, such as compilers. We have a lot of parallel builds, and each call to a license server is actually problematic in the long run.

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 most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."

"In summary, this is a good application that you can use to scan every code language."

"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are its integration with multiple SCM solutions and CICD tools, its ability to scale according to user licenses, and the quick scanning process."

"The scalability of the solution is good."

"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."

"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."

"The solution allows us to create custom rules for code checks."

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

More Checkmarx One pros

"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."

"Efficiency and speed are the advantages I see in Code Sonar over Polyspace Code Prover."

"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."

"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."

"The product detects memory corruptions."

"The outputs are very reliable."

Cons

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

"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."

"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."

"We would like to be able to run scans from our local system, rather than having to always connect to the product server, which is a longer process."

"Implementing a blackout time for any user or teams: Needs improvement."

"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."

"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."

"When we first ran it on a big project, there wasn't enough memory on the computer. It originally ran with eight gigabytes, and now it runs with 32. The software stopped at some point, and while I don't think it said it ran out of memory, it just said "stopped" and something else. We had to go to the logs and send them to the integrator, and eventually, they found a memory issue in the logs and recommended increasing the memory. We doubled it once, and it didn't seem enough. We doubled it again, and it helped."

More Checkmarx One cons

"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."

"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."

"The tool has some stability issues."

"Automation could be a challenge."

"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."

"Because we had difficulties in efficiently integrating Polyspace Code Prover into our CI toolchain, these tests are mostly run manually and only occasionally."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is costly."

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

"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."

"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."

"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."

"The tool's pricing is fine."

"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)."

More Checkmarx One pricing and cost advice

"We use the paid version."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Manufacturing Company

38%

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Computer Software Company

Healthcare 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
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	6

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

What needs improvement with Polyspace Code Prover?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Polyspace Code Prover?

It is validation for Functional Safety applications in automotive.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Polyspace Code Prover?

We are actually trying to consolidate everything into one solution. To reduce, that might also be a new solution, but we're not currently actively looking for that. It's just that we'd prefer to fi...

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

OpenText Core Application Security vs Checkmarx One

Compared 2% of the time

More Checkmarx One Competitors

SonarQube vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 13% of the time

Coverity Static vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 12% of the time

Klocwork vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 11% of the time

CodeSonar vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 8% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 3% of the time

More Polyspace Code Prover Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One

June 2026

Download Checkmarx One product report

Buyer's Guide

Polyspace Code Prover

June 2026

Download Polyspace Code Prover 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

Polyspace Code Prover boosts code reliability by identifying critical issues like memory corruption and null pointer dereferences, adhering to ISO 26262 standards.

Polyspace Code Prover offers advanced static code analysis tailored to detect complex runtime issues, making it a substantial asset in safety-critical software development. With features that facilitate easy integration with minimal tool switching, it effectively examines code segment runtimes for potential faults such as memory overflows. Polyspace Code Prover stands out by providing mathematical proofs of correctness, differentiating it from other static tools. However, improvements in processing speed and large-scale application handling remain necessary. While integration challenges exist with CI environments like AWS and Azure, the tool's efficiency is valued in automotive applications for unit-level verification and requirement-based component development, despite some scalability limitations.

What are Polyspace Code Prover's key features?

Division by Zero Checks: Ensures code stability and reliability by identifying risky operations.
Memory Corruption Detection: Safeguards against potential memory leaks and access violations.
ISO 26262 Compliance: Aligns with critical automotive industry standards.
Mathematical Correctness Proof: Provides certainty in logic correctness, unique in static analysis tools.
Minimal Tool Switching: Enhances user efficiency with seamless integration into workflows.

What benefits can be gained from Polyspace Code Prover?

Enhanced Code Reliability: Reduces faults and improves the robustness of developed code.
Increased Efficiency: Fast analysis with minimal tool changes streamlines workflow.
Compliance Assurance: Supports meeting stringent industry standards.
Risk Reduction: Identifies critical issues early, minimizing potential downtime or defects.

In industries such as automotive, Polyspace Code Prover is crucial for Functional Safety validation. It is applied in diverse projects like vertical control systems and cluster infotainment, with a focus on requirement-based component development. Despite challenges in larger applications, it remains a vital tool for analyzing Simulink models and small-scale implementations.

MathWorks

Sample Customers

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

Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx One vs. Polyspace Code Prover

June 2026

Free Report: Checkmarx One vs. Polyspace Code Prover

Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Polyspace Code Prover and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx One vs. Polyspace Code Prover report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.

We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.