Checkmarx SAST vs SonarQube comparison

Checkmarx and SonarSource Sàrl are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Checkmarx is ranked #23 with an average rating of 7.7, while SonarSource Sàrl is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.2. Checkmarx holds a 1.7% mindshare in SAST, compared to SonarSource Sàrl’s 18.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of SonarSource Sàrl users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx SAST

Read 5 Checkmarx SAST reviews

1,473 Views
1,458 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

SonarQube

Read 134 SonarQube reviews

38,374 Views
28,013 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Checkmarx SAST

SonarQube

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

SonarQube and Checkmarx SAST compete in the static application security testing domain. Checkmarx SAST has the upper hand in security features, while SonarQube is favored for pricing and integration ease.

Features: SonarQube offers an open-source platform with comprehensive code quality analysis across multiple languages, excellent CI/CD integration, and SonarLint for local scanning. Checkmarx SAST provides advanced security testing capabilities, real-time code analysis, and extensive vulnerability coverage, meeting critical security needs.

Room for Improvement: SonarQube could enhance its security vulnerability identification and improve customer support options for premium users. Checkmarx SAST might benefit from reducing false positives, improving documentation for better user experience, and streamlining the complexity of its deployment.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: SonarQube is straightforward to deploy, ideal for teams accustomed to open-source solutions, but has limited professional support. Checkmarx SAST offers more complex deployment but comes with dedicated customer service, aiding larger enterprises with integration processes and support resources.

Pricing and ROI: SonarQube's open-source nature and lower setup costs offer immediate savings, appealing to cost-conscious teams. Although Checkmarx SAST requires a higher initial investment, it promises better long-term ROI for organizations prioritizing comprehensive security due to its superior security testing features.

To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx SAST vs. SonarQube Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx SAST vs. SonarQube

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 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 SAST

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

23rd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

SonarQube

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

134

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (1st), Software Development Analytics (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx SAST is 1.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube is 18.2%, down from 26.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
SonarQube	18.2%
Checkmarx SAST	1.7%
Other	80.1%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Tharindu Malwenna

Senior Application Security Engineer at a newspaper with 5,001-10,000 employees

Has supported early vulnerability detection but requires tuning to reduce false positives and scanning delays

When assessing the accuracy and efficiency of Checkmarx SAST scanning capabilities, they are currently recommending that doing the full scan is the main, correct way of scanning the repositories. However, based on the repository size we have, it sometimes takes more than 10 minutes for larger repositories, which is a downside. The accuracy of the results depends on various factors, as some of the test folders tend to give us false positives, which makes a huge impact on the vulnerabilities. Those are the major things that we have to fine-tune from our end. I would rate Checkmarx SAST around a seven, as it does have some false positives we have to work with, which are the major concerning things. The number of false positives is significant because we cannot implement policies because of this.

Read full review

KarthikHarpanhalli

Sr Software Engineering Supervisor at Mozarc Medical

Gains control over rule customization and achieves reliable vulnerability assessment

The deployment process took me about 2 or 3 hours to deploy SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube), although I do not remember exactly since it was done about 2 years back. Currently, about 10 of my developers are using SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) in my company. I do not have plans to increase the usage of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) in the future as there will not be any requirement to increase. I am a senior software engineer and supervisor at Mozark Medical. My corporate email address is karthik.k.a.r.t.h.i.k.h.a.r.p.a.n.h.a.l.l.i@mozarkmedical.com. Overall, I would rate SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) as a 9 out of 10.

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 detailed reports from Checkmarx SAST help with our security process by showing details about which line is actually vulnerable, which is beneficial for the developers, and I do not have any suggestions or inputs on that area."

"The most important feature is that Checkmarx protects our company against attacks."

"The most important competitive advantage and benefit is the ability to identify vulnerabilities in the source code immediately without needing to complete the coding."

"This helps us a lot in identifying vulnerabilities in early stages, and the integration within the IDEs helps developers get the results into their IDE itself, making it easier for them to fix vulnerabilities."

"The most important feature is that Checkmarx protects our company against attacks."

"The CX1 is a unified platform that covers all components such as SAST, SCA, DAST, container scanning, and infrastructure code, which is quite beneficial because some clients need one-stop solutions for all their needs."

"Before you even compile, it can catch known vulnerability issues or patterns."

"The most valuable features are the dashboard, the ability to drill down to the code, user-friendly, and the technical debt estimation."

"The solution can verify vulnerabilities, code smells, and hotspots. It makes the software more secure and it helps make a junior or novice developer sharper."

"We have the software metrics that SonarQube gives us, which is something we did not have before. This helps us work towards aiming coding standards to empower us to move in the direction of better code quality. SonarQube provides targets and metrics for that."

"Overall, I would rate SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) as a 9 out of 10."

"I like that it covers most programming languages for source code review."

"Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service."

"I like that it helps us maintain our work quality and code security."

More SonarQube pros

Cons

"The accuracy of the results depends on various factors, as some of the test folders tend to give us false positives, which makes a huge impact on the vulnerabilities."

"The main challenge with Checkmarx SAST is the price. The price is a challenge because Checkmarx SAST is a very big brand, and many mid-sized companies cannot afford it as they are very price-conscious."

"We had some issues where Checkmarx did not recognize a vulnerability."

"The on-premises version is more expensive compared to the cloud version."

"I believe that nothing in particular could be improved about Checkmarx SAST, only the turnaround time and the fact that technical account managers keep moving around, which leads to some lag in communication."

"We had some issues where Checkmarx did not recognize a vulnerability. We had to talk with the vendor, and they had to include an improvement in the tool to resolve this issue."

"It would be better if SonarQube provided a good UI for external configuration."

"A little bit more emphasis on security and a bit more security scanning features would be nice."

"For improvement, this solution could be offered on Docker and the cloud and the support for this solution could be improved. Customizing rules could also be made simpler."

"I would also like SonarQube to be able to write custom scanning rules. More documentation would be helpful as well because some of our guys were struggling with the customization script."

"I would like to see SonarQube implement a good amount of improvements to the product's security features. Another aspect of SonarQube that could be improved is the search functionality."

"I have found this solution creates more noise than competitors."

"SonarQube could improve by adding automatic creation of tasks after scanning and more support for the Czech language."

"In terms of analysis and findings, other tools provide more in-depth insights and detailed steps to mitigate or handle issues."

More SonarQube cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"The price of the solution could be reduced."

"Previously, the pricing was 17,000 euros for five million lines analyzed. However, they now charge $15,000 per one million lines, significantly increasing the cost."

"The licence is standard open source licensing"

"I am satisfied with the pricing."

"I use the full trial version of SonarQube."

"As a user and a consumer of this solution, it can be pricey for my company to support and use, even though there are many benefits. For this reason, we use the free version. In the future, as our product cycles develop and evolve at a more steady pace, we hope to invest in the licensing for this tool."

"We did not purchase a license (required for C++ support), but this option was considered."

"I think comparing the product to competitors it should be less expensive."

More SonarQube pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

21%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	41
Midsize Enterprise	24
Large Enterprise	79

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Checkmarx SAST?

We were users in a small country, and we paid one consolidated bill for all the tools, so I don't know the specific amount for Checkmarx.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Checkmarx SAST?

I believe that nothing in particular could be improved about Checkmarx SAST, only the turnaround time and the fact that technical account managers keep moving around, which leads to some lag in com...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Checkmarx SAST?

I manage the application security side of the products here, currently utilizing solutions such as Checkmarx, Akamai, Traceable, and Invicti, which are the security scanning tools that we use. In t...

See all answers

Is SonarQube the best tool for static analysis?

I am not very familiar with SonarQube and their solutions, so I can not answer. But if you are asking me about which tools that are the best for for Static Code Analysis, I suggest you have a look...

See all answers

Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?

SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...

See all answers

How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?

We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...

See all answers

Comparisons

Checkmarx One vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 35% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 11% of the time

Veracode vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 9% of the time

Snyk vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 7% of the time

GitLab vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 5% of the time

More Checkmarx SAST Competitors

Checkmarx One vs SonarQube

Compared 28% of the time

Snyk vs SonarQube

Compared 9% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs SonarQube

Compared 6% of the time

Coverity Static vs SonarQube

Compared 5% of the time

Semgrep vs SonarQube

Compared 4% of the time

More SonarQube Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx SAST

February 2026

Download Checkmarx SAST product report

Buyer's Guide

SonarQube

January 2026

Download SonarQube product report

Also Known As

SAST

Sonar, SonarQube Cloud

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

Checkmarx

SonarSource Sàrl

Overview

Checkmarx SAST provides advanced static application security testing by identifying vulnerabilities in source code. It's ideal for ISOs, security professionals, and developers striving to secure applications during development.

Checkmarx SAST is known for its powerful code scanning capabilities that integrate seamlessly into existing development environments. It supports a wide range of programming languages, which makes it applicable for diverse development projects. Some users suggest improvements in the scan performance speed and enhanced support in handling false positives to further optimize workflow efficiency.

What are the standout features of Checkmarx SAST?

Language Support: Offers broad language support catering to multiple coding frameworks.
Integration Flexibility: Seamlessly integrates with existing CI/CD pipelines and developer tools.
Comprehensive Scanning: Detects security vulnerabilities early in the development process.
Detailed Reporting: Provides comprehensive reports that help prioritize remediation efforts.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Improved Security Posture: Enhances application security by catching vulnerabilities early.
Cost Efficiency: Reduces costs associated with post-deployment issue resolution.
Developer Empowerment: Allows developers to identify and fix issues independently.
Regulatory Compliance: Assists in meeting compliance requirements efficiently.

Implemented across various industries, Checkmarx SAST supports sectors like finance, healthcare, and technology with their stringent security requirements. By integrating seamlessly into existing workflows, it ensures that applications remain secure while not disrupting industry-specific processes.

Checkmarx

SonarQube leads automated code review, enhancing code quality and security in AI-driven SDLCs. It analyzes pull requests, providing developers with actionable feedback and AI-driven fixes before code merges. Trusted by top enterprises, it supports SaaS and self-managed deployments.

SonarQube supports a wide range of programming languages and integrates seamlessly with CI/CD tools like Jenkins. It is renowned for its static code analysis, code coverage, and security vulnerability detection. While its open-source foundation and scalability are praised, users seek enhanced integration across multiple languages, better security features, and improved documentation. Despite challenges, its ability to automate code inspections and ensure compliance with coding standards makes it essential in software development processes, facilitating continuous improvement.

What are the most important features?

Language Support: Extensive support for multiple programming languages.
Custom Coding Rules: Allows defining project-specific rules.
Integration: Seamlessly works with Jenkins and CI/CD pipelines.
Quality Gates: Simplifies monitoring code quality.
Dashboards: Facilitates easy monitoring and management.
Static Code Analysis: Detects issues early in development.
Security Detection: Identifies vulnerabilities automatically.

What benefits should users look for?

Improved Code Quality: Enhances reliability and maintainability.
Security Assurance: Strengthens code against vulnerabilities.
Technical Debt Reduction: Ensures cleaner, maintainable code.
Efficient Feedback: Speeds up development cycles.
Standards Compliance: Aids in adhering to best practices.

In industries like finance, healthcare, and automotive, SonarQube is leveraged for static code analysis, automating code inspections, and ensuring compliance with stringent standards. Teams integrate it into their CI/CD pipelines to maintain high-quality code, identify security vulnerabilities, and enhance code maintainability.

SonarSource Sàrl

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Snowflake, Booking.com, Deutsche Bank, AstraZeneca, and Ford Motor Company.

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx SAST vs. SonarQube

February 2026

Free Report: Checkmarx SAST vs. SonarQube

Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx SAST vs. SonarQube and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx SAST vs. SonarQube report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.