No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Checkmarx One vs Rapid7 AppSpider 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)
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Vulnerability Management (11th), Container Security (13th), 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 (3rd)
Rapid7 AppSpider
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
30th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 8.8%, down from 10.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 AppSpider is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One8.8%
Rapid7 AppSpider0.7%
Other90.5%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Shahzad Shahzad - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
HW
Marketing Expert at J's communication
Clients benefit from broad authentication and effective crawling but need localization improvements
Our clients use AppSpider to address security concerns for their websites. It is particularly used by customers who require security assessments One of the most valuable features of AppSpider is its broad range of authentication identification, which is a key reason for its utilization.…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It can integrate very well with DAST solutions. So both of them are combined into an integrated solution for customers running application security."
"I like that you don't have to compile the code in order to execute static code analysis. So, it's very handy."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the SCA module and the code-checking module. Additionally, the solutions are explanatory and helpful."
"It has made our organization more efficient with our whole code scan/deployment process for our software applications."
"It has all the features we need."
"Overall, the ability to find vulnerabilities in the code is better than the tool that we were using before."
"In my opinion, Checkmarx gives better results, and its protection is better than SonarQube."
"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 initial deployment is very straightforward and simple. The product is stable if configured properly."
"The entire solution is interactive and has a point-and-click user experience, which makes it easy to find items or drill down on information, and you don't need specialized skills to use the product."
"One of the most valuable features of AppSpider is its broad range of authentication identification, which is a key reason for its utilization."
"It is really accurate and the rate of false positives is very low."
"This solution is a leader in the industry."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting, which is compliant with international standards."
"Customer service has been quite good."
"AppSpider's most valuable feature is reporting - everything is stored in the local database so it can be sent to other machines."
 

Cons

"I would like to see the rate of false positives reduced."
"Checkmarx could improve the solution reports and false positives. The false positives could be reduced. For example, we have alerts that are tagged as vulnerabilities but when you drill down they are not."
"The Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) feature should be better."
"Meta data is always needed."
"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."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it seems outdated."
"Checkmarx could improve the REST APIs by including automation."
"This product requires you to create your own rulesets. You have to do a lot of customization."
"Support response times are slow and can be improved."
"The tech support is responsive but issues remain unresolved."
"One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions."
"Integration could be better. For example, while doing the scanning, using the recording username and passwords, there are issues."
"Integration could be better."
"The documentation about integration with AppSpider is bad news and some integrations are quite difficult to do right now."
"There are some glitches with stability, and it is an area for improvement."
"The dashboard and interface are crucial and they need some improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The number of users and coverage for languages will have an impact on the cost of the license."
"It's relatively expensive."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
"I would rate the solution’s pricing an eight out of ten. The tool’s pricing is higher than others and it is for the license alone."
"The solution is costly."
"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."
"It is a good product but a little overpriced."
"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."
"AppSpider is closed-source software and you need to acquire a license in order to use it."
"It is expensive if you want to buy the Enterprise version that is able to scan multiple applications at once."
"The price is pretty fair."
"The price of Rapid7 AppSpider cost 9,000 annually but there is limited usage. Large companies are able to negotiate a better price or a better deal for the usage with the vendor."
"The licensing cost depends on the number of users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
11%
University
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction 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 Business12
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

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 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...
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Rapid7 AppSpider?
The price is not high, but for Japanese customers, localization may incur additional costs.
What needs improvement with Rapid7 AppSpider?
For Japanese customers, localization is needed. The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users.
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 AppSpider?
Our clients use AppSpider to address security concerns for their websites. It is particularly used by customers who require security assessments.
 

Also Known As

No data available
AppSpider
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Microsoft
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Rapid7 AppSpider and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.