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

Checkmarx One vs Rapid7 InsightAppSec comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Vulnerability Management (15th), Container Security (14th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (4th), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (2nd)
Rapid7 InsightAppSec
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
AI Observability (19th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 14.4%, down from 23.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 InsightAppSec is 5.7%, up from 4.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One14.4%
Rapid7 InsightAppSec5.7%
Other79.9%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

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.
Shritam Bhowmick - PeerSpot reviewer
Vulnerability Management Lead at garrett
Provides reliable applications security but needs better integration options
There are areas for improvements regarding false positives. Integration capabilities are lacking, as options for integrations with other tools such as SNOW, Jira, or other integration tools are not sufficient in Rapid7 InsightAppSec. The user interface sometimes has glitches, which may prevent appropriate results during navigation, and even when we get appropriate results, it can be impossible to export them to CSV records or download files. Regarding scalability, Rapid7 InsightAppSec is not a scalable solution for our industry due to limited integration capabilities. Rapid7 relies on another tool called InsightConnect, which requires additional investment, detracting from scalability. Another area that needs improvement is the integration of AI capabilities into the platform. Both Rapid7 InsightAppSec and InsightVM need to advance in that area. In terms of behavioral and pattern recognition, identifying complex attacks such as SQL, blind SQL, JSON, and LDAP injections often results in 94% false positives. This necessitates improvement in their behavioral-based analytics feature.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution improved the efficiency of our code security reviews. It helps tremendously because it finds hundreds of potential problems sometimes."
"Less false positive errors as compared to any other solution."
"The solution is always updating to continuously add items that create a level of safety from vulnerabilities, and they are always ahead of the game when it comes to finding any vulnerabilities within the database, so I am assured that when I am scanning my product those vulnerabilities are identified at very initial stages, giving my development team more time to react."
"By using the automated testing in Checkmarx One, we have saved around one or two days in a full week of our team because we have a lot of code to do with seven markets."
"It can integrate very well with DAST solutions. So both of them are combined into an integrated solution for customers running application security."
"Even if there are multiple vulnerabilities in the source coding, Checkmarx is able to identify which lines need to be corrected and then proceeds to automatically remediate the situation."
"The solution communicates where to fix the issue for the purpose of less iterations."
"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."
"Relatively speaking, InsightAppSec is good compared to Insight VM."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec is a good product for dynamic application security testing, providing neat reports that include validation actions and helping to generate web application firewall rules for web applications."
"It uses a signature-based method to check for problems with your code and will provide an alert if anything is found."
"We have seen measurable decrease in the mean time to respond to threats by 20 percent."
"If a company needs an effective product for web scanning, I can recommend this product."
"The templates feature is very easy; you just choose the kind of attack you want on your web application, and you run it against that template and receive a report, which is great."
"I rate stability ten out of ten."
"Customers use the product for scanning purposes and do not want to be restricted with respect to the number of scans they perform."
 

Cons

"Checkmarx One can be improved by reducing noise and improving false positive filtering."
"I would like to see the rate of false positives reduced."
"The validation process needs to be sped up."
"Checkmarx could improve the speed of the scans."
"Presently they support micro-services, but the supporting methodology of the micro-services is not good enough at the moment."
"The resolutions should also be provided. For example, if the user faces any problem regarding an installation due to the internal security policies of their company, there should be a resolution offered."
"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."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"They should add more features. I would like to see them do a little more on static analysis and also interactivity analysis. Currently, it does very basic static analysis. It could do a little more static analysis, which is something that would help. A lot more interactivity analysis should also be there. It should basically look at security during interactivity."
"The reporting is definitely an aspect of the solution that's in need of some work. We found that we'd try to use widgets, but often getting them to work for us wasn't very clear. They need to be more user friendly or offer better instructions."
"We'd like to see integrations with WAF solutions."
"The performance can be improved."
"The number of web applications we can scan is limited."
"The only concern I have with Rapid7 is that it does not provide enough information about vulnerabilities within AppSec."
"There is room for improvement in Rapid7 InsightAppSec by giving clients the ability for extra columns on reports and enabling the extraction of remediation reports into a CSV format. Currently, the PDF format is cumbersome to go through when dealing with thousands of pages."
"The interface should be a little bit easier to manage. Sometimes, the logic that they use is kind of strange."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is expensive."
"It is an expensive solution."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"​Checkmarx is not a cheap scanning tool, but none of the security tools are cheap. Checkmarx is a powerful scanning tool, and it’s essential to have one of these products."
"It's relatively expensive."
"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."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec is cheap."
"They offer a good price, but I don't remember its cost. It is fair as compared to the competition. We have opted for project-based licensing, not user-based. We can add any number of users. That doesn't matter. It is worth the money."
"The price of this product is very cheap."
"I rate Rapid7 InsightAppSec’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"I'm not sure how much it costs exactly, but I know it's expensive."
"Its price is competitive. It is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
5%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
9%
Government
9%
 

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 Enterprise5
 

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 needs improvement with Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
Customers sometimes experience issues with performance. One thing that I recall is that most customers often want to have reporting as per their customized dashboard. This needs to be improved beca...
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
I usually recommend this solution for financial institutions. Banks and financial institutions need this solution mostly because they have to follow stringent compliance advisory requirements, so t...
What advice do you have for others considering Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
I have not heard any complaints. I do not have any recommendations because customers were initially worried about the number of scans they used to perform, and now it has been enhanced or it will s...
 

Also Known As

No data available
InsightAppSec
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
CenterPoint Energy, CPA Australia, Hypertherm, First American Financial Corporation, Rackspace
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.