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 (11th), Container Security (13th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (4th), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (10th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd), AI Security (3rd)
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 (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx One is 13.9%, down from 22.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 InsightAppSec is 5.7%, up from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Checkmarx One13.9%
Rapid7 InsightAppSec5.7%
Other80.4%
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

"Checkmarx One has definitely helped us to save time and reduce the need for additional security resources, meaning employees."
"One of the most valuable features is it is flexible."
"The consistency of code showed our team where they are inconsistent or where they have made simple omissions."
"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 SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."
"Apart from software scanning, software composition scanning is valuable."
"The value you can get out of the speedy production may be worth the price tag."
"Overall, we are very satisfied with Checkmarx and it is a product that I recommend."
"The reporting functionality is excellent."
"The initial setup for us was easy enough. We didn't face too many issues. Deployment took maybe 30 minutes. It's quite quick and doesn't cause too much trouble at the outset."
"The automatic automation of the automated authorization to the SCANNET environment is valuable."
"I would rate the technical support from Rapid7 a ten, indicating high-quality support."
"Relatively speaking, InsightAppSec is good compared to Insight VM."
"When considering DAST, it is not attributed to a singular feature but rather the capabilities of the engine that provides a genuine penetration testing experience and delivers insightful reports."
"It uses a signature-based method to check for problems with your code and will provide an alert if anything is found."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the graphical interface."
 

Cons

"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"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 had to lock the number of CPUs used to not crash the Checkmarx Audit."
"I really would like to integrate it as a service along with the SAP HANA Cloud Platform. It will then be easy to use it directly as a service."
"The Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) feature should be better."
"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)."
"Vulnerability details: Reduce false positive results and improve it by providing more details how I can resolve the vulnerability."
"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"The only concern I have with Rapid7 is that it does not provide enough information about vulnerabilities within AppSec."
"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."
"The product’s pricing could be flexible."
"The number of web applications we can scan is limited."
"When you add new projects for the same product, it either duplicates or replaces the scan configuration. If I run a scan for the same product with a different scan configuration, it should keep the previous scan configuration and not replace it with the new scan configuration. It should just add the new scan configuration. That would be helpful. They do keep the results as it is, but the scan configuration keeps changing. For example, I have set a scan configuration to a full scan, and next week, I want to run a new scan for the same product with some changes or new functionalities. I want to run a partial scan. Currently, if I change the scan configuration to partial, it changes the old one also to partial. That should be improved."
"I required a solution to manage on-premises, but I was not as satisfied as expected."
"The interface should be a little bit easier to manage. Sometimes, the logic that they use is kind of strange."
"The reporting feature of Rapid7 InsightAppSec needs improvement as it currently provides basic reports."
 

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)."
"It is the right price for quality delivery."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
"The price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is expensive."
"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)."
"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."
"For around 250 users or committers, the cost is approximately $500,000."
"We have a subscription license that is on a yearly basis, and it's a pretty competitive solution."
"The price of this product is very cheap."
"I rate Rapid7 InsightAppSec’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"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."
"Its price is competitive. It is not expensive."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec is cheap."
"I'm not sure how much it costs exactly, but I know it's expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) 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
13%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
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: June 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.