Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Checkmarx One vs Xygeni comparison

Sponsored
 

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

Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto N...
Sponsored
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.5
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (28th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (13th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (18th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (13th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (12th), Software Supply Chain Security (8th), Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (7th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (5th)
Checkmarx One
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
3rd
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) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (17th), Container Security (15th), Static Code Analysis (2nd), API Security (3rd), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (2nd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (7th), AI Security (2nd)
Xygeni
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
10th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (21st), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (13th), Software Supply Chain Security (13th)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1980216 - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Development Manager For Palo Alto Networks at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Unified security platform has simplified multi-cloud protection and improved threat response
From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market. Additionally, there is not a clear MSP model compared to other vendors such as CrowdStrike. These are significant limitations, especially today when managed services are becoming increasingly important for end users. Palo Alto decided to limit some functionalities because they want to stress more on Cortex XSIAM. I do not agree with this strategy because Cortex XSIAM is a completely different market compared to Cortex XDR. This is the main issue of Cortex—the commercial model Palo Alto is implementing. The product is very good; the problem is the commercial model. There are probably some areas for improvement because Palo Alto is growing too much. Today the challenge is to have skilled people, which I believe is the same issue everywhere. I do not agree with this decision.
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.
AI
Business development manager at RSsecurity
Unified monitoring has reduced alert noise and provides accurate, proactive application security
Xygeni was highly effective for us, but there are areas where improvements could be made. More customization options for dashboards and reports would help teams tailor the platform to their specific metrics and workflows. I also occasionally encounter DevOps tools that are not yet supported natively. Expanded coverage for niche or emerging tools would make onboarding even smoother. These points, however, are minor compared to the overall value the platform delivers, especially given the strength of its AI-driven detection, remediation, and supply chain protection capabilities. It would also be an improvement for licensing with regard to on-premise variants. Perhaps we could have an on-premise option for standard subscription.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The AI and automation features in detecting and responding to high-risk threats are impressive; it's one of the best tools regarding AI technology and unifies security in one platform in real-time, improving vulnerability analysis, incident response, and compliance reporting."
"Overall, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a technically strong product, and I rate it ten out of ten."
"I have seen several benefits from using Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks: It was easy to use and easy to migrate from the IBM platform."
"I have absolutely seen improvements in our incident close rates, with mean time to detect and respond reduced significantly, sometimes by at least forty to fifty percent."
"The most beneficial aspect of Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Palo Alto in general is that there is a single platform for all cloud providers for securitization."
"From a technical standpoint or pricing, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a stronger solution in the market at the moment compared to other products from ConnectWise or Symantec."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks has impacted our organization positively by keeping our machines secure and our team using the dashboard to find issues quickly."
"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."
"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."
"Both automatic and manual code review (CxQL) are valuable."
"It is very useful because it fits our requirements. It is also easy to use. It is not complex, and we are satisfied with the results."
"The identification of verification-related security vulnerabilities is really important and one of the key things. It also identifies vulnerabilities for any kind of third-party tool coming into the system or any third-party tools that you are using, which is very useful for avoiding random hacking."
"What I like best about Checkmarx is that it has fewer false positives than other products, giving you better results."
"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"Most valuable features include: ease of use, dashboard. interface and the ability to report."
"The visibility of our open-source supply chain dependencies and real-time detection of vulnerabilities have been invaluable."
"Since using Xygeni, the time to review vulnerabilities has decreased."
"Xygeni provides a comprehensive and developer-friendly approach to securing the entire software supply chain."
 

Cons

"Overall, I rate Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks as an eight out of ten. I think that it could improve on price, as I know that the Google solution has the best price, and this is one of the conditions."
"Some aspects of the GUI can be confusing and make it difficult for me to find certain options or navigate where needed."
"The pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is creating some confusion in terms of names because this is recent."
"From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market."
"The negative aspects or areas for improvement in the product include the fact that the cost might be a bit high, which challenges commercials, but not technically."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"I would like the product to include more debugging and developed tools. It needs to also add enhancements on the coding side."
"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."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"You can't use it in the continuous delivery pipeline because the scanning takes too much time."
"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 reports are good, but they still need to be improved considering what the UI offers."
"The product can be improved by continuing to expand the application languages and frameworks that can be scanned for vulnerabilities. This includes expanded coverage for mobile applications as well as open-source development tools."
"Xygeni was highly effective for us, but there are areas where improvements could be made."
"There should be more configuration options that make it easier to target the issues that are more important in your organization's context."
"Xygeni could be improved if on-premise options were available starting from the starter packages, not only the enterprise models."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It is an expensive solution."
"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 solution is costly."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
"I believe pricing is better compared to other commercial tools."
"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."
"The solution's price is high and you pay based on the number of users."
"The average deal size was usually anywhere between $120K to $175K on an annual basis, which could be divided across 12 months."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Performing Arts
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
5%
Comms Service Provider
32%
Security Firm
17%
Retailer
15%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise46
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
The solution is costly, with high-end capabilities suitable for enterprises. It is less affordable for startups or sm...
What needs improvement with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
Regarding areas for improvement, the tool performs its functions well, but frequent name changes across Palo Alto Net...
What is your primary use case for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks serves as our primary tool for understanding our assets and performing API integra...
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 ...
What do you like most about Checkmarx?
Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%.
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 additi...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Xygeni?
The experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Xygeni was great, as it suits the requests.
What needs improvement with Xygeni?
Xygeni was highly effective for us, but there are areas where improvements could be made. More customization options ...
What is your primary use case for Xygeni?
I most often use Xygeni for monitoring our applications. When monitoring our applications, I use Xygeni when I see ch...
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
BKool, Onum, Napptive, Fintonic, Adaion, Metricool, Arexdata, ...
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx One vs. Xygeni and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.