Checkmarx
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Checkmarx's? The following comparison table enables you to
discern the performance of both providers across various attributes essential for meeting your company’s
cybersecurity needs. To better understand each attribute, read their descriptions in the dedicated page.
Organization
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Checkmarx
|
|
Focus
|
Native ASPM with in-house scanners
|
||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Headcount
|
991 | ||
|
Headcount distribution
|
Engineering 42%, IT 13%, sales 13%,
marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 26%
|
Engineering 30%, IT 18%, sales 17%,
marketing 3%, operations 2% and others 30%
|
|
|
Headcount growth
|
+8%, +10%, -8%
|
+5%, +10%, +8% | |
|
Headquarters
|
CO and US
|
FR, IN, IL, PT, SG, UK and US
|
|
|
Countries
|
AR, BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and
US
|
IL, IN, PT and US | |
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
8.55 from 172 reviews over 10 years on
G2, Gartner, PeerSpot, Software Advice and TrustRadius
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
147K based on the following: Facebook,
LinkedIn, X and YouTube
|
|
|
Research firms
|
None
|
None
|
Forrester, Frost & Sullivan,
GigaOM, IDC, Info-Tech Research Group and Nucleus Research
|
|
Founded
|
2001 |
2006
|
|
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
$92M USD in 4 rounds from 6 investors
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
Acquired 0 times and made 3
acquisitions
|
|
Revenue
|
10M to 15M
|
100M to 500M
|
|
|
CVEs as CNA Researcher
|
10 CVEs reported to MITRE
|
||
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
CSA STAR Level 1, FedRAMP Authorized,
HIPAA, ISO/IEC 27001 and SOC 2 Type II
|
|
|
Bug bounty
|
No
|
||
|
Visits
|
21K per month. Top 3: 26% CO, 8% FR,
7% US. Others 59%
|
80K per month. Top 3: 20% US, 16% IN,
13% IL. Others 51%
|
|
|
Authority
|
44 out of 100
|
||
|
Public vulnerability DB
|
Discovered and third-party
|
Discovered and third-party
|
|
|
Content
|
Same
|
Analysis reports, blog, customer
testimonials, documentation, infographics, reports, solution briefs, videos, webinars
and white papers
|
|
| Comprehensive documentation |
13 documentation sections, 7 in common
and 6 additional
|
8 documentation sections, 7 in common and 1 additional | |
|
Community
|
Forum | ||
|
Sync training
|
1 workshop
|
2 live security education courses
(subscription-based)
|
|
|
Async training
|
3 product use courses, all free
|
Security education platform
(subscription-based)
|
|
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
Direct or with any of its 66 partners
|
|
| Marketplaces | AWS | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Free trial
|
PoC
|
||
|
Demo
|
Yes
|
||
|
Open demo
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Pricing
|
Contact sales and marketplace
|
||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
5 plans (SAST, SSCS, essentials,
professional, enterprise). None transparent
|
|
Minimum term
|
Annually
|
||
|
Minimum payment period
|
Annually
|
||
|
Minimum capabilities
|
ASPM, binary SAST, containers, CSPM, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and
secrets
|
Same plus: API security testing, PTaaS, RE and SCR
|
SAST
|
|
Minimum scope
|
1 author
|
1 license
|
|
|
Pricing drivers
|
Developers
|
||
|
Minimum monthly payment
|
86 USD
|
||
|
Free implementation
|
No
|
||
|
Free support
|
No
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Checkmarx
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
No | |
|
Secure code review
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Pivoting
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Exploitation
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Manual reattacks
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Zero-day
vulnerabilities
|
None
|
Continuous zero-day vulnerability research
|
Continuous zero-day vulnerability
research
|
|
SLA
|
Availability and response | ||
|
Min availability
|
>=99.95% per minute LTM
|
>=99.5% per period
|
|
|
After-sale guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
No |
|
Accreditations
|
CNA, DevOps ISV Competency and
Security ISV Competency
|
||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
Employee
|
|
Endpoint control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Channel control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements from 67 standards, 18 in common and 49
additional
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
20 standards, 18 in common and 2
additional
|
|
Detection method
|
Automated tools, AI and human intelligence
|
Automated tools and AI
|
|
|
False positives
|
3.87 times better
|
6.66 times better
|
12% F0.5 score per quantity
|
|
False negatives
|
5.6 times better
|
17.98 times better
|
4% F2.0 score per severity
|
|
Remediation
|
5, 3 in common and 2 additional
|
Same, plus 1
|
4, 3 in common and 1 additional
|
|
Outputs
|
5, 4 in common and 1
additional
|
Same, plus 2
|
6, 4 in common and 2 additional
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Checkmarx
|
|
ASPM
|
Yes
|
||
|
API
|
REST with JSON
|
||
|
IDE
|
5 functionalities, 4 in common and 1
additional
|
Same, plus 1 functionality
|
6 functionalities, 4 in common and 2
additional
|
|
CLI
|
Yes
|
||
|
CI/CD
|
Breaks the build
|
||
|
Vulnerability sources
|
4 sources, 1 in common and 3 additional
|
6 sources, 1 in common and 5 additional
|
|
|
Threat model alignment
|
Yes
|
||
|
Priority criteria
|
CVSS v4.0, EPSS and KEV
|
||
|
Custom prioritization
|
Project classification
|
||
|
Scanner origin
|
In-house and external (ZAP for DAST and
KICS for IaC)
|
||
|
SCA
|
23 package managers, 14 in common and 9
additional
|
19 package managers, 14 in common and 5
additional
|
|
|
AI security
|
No
|
No | |
|
Reachability
|
12 languages
|
Yes. No information available
|
|
|
Reachability type
|
Deterministic
|
||
|
SBOM
|
22 package managers, 11 in common and 11
additional
|
19 package managers, 11 in common and 8
additional
|
|
|
Malware detection
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
Autofix on components
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
Containers
|
4 distributions, 3 in common and 1 additional
|
3 distributions, all in common
|
|
|
Source SAST
(languages)
|
12, 11 in common and 1 additional
|
36, 11 in common and 25 additional
|
|
|
Source SAST
(frameworks)
|
22, 10 in common and 12 additional
|
52, 10 in common and 42 additional
|
|
|
Custom rules
|
No
|
No
|
Policies
|
|
IaC
|
6, 5 in common and 1 additional
|
4, all in common
|
12, 9 in common and 3 additional |
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type of binary
|
No
|
|
|
DAST
|
7 attack surface types, 2 in common and
5 additional
|
3 attack surface types, 2 in common
and 5 additional
|
|
|
API security testing
|
No
|
4 types of APIs, 3 in common and 1
additional
|
3 types of APIs, all in common |
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes |
No
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Secrets
|
15 secrets types, 5 in common and 10
additional
|
Same, plus verify other attack vectors
and secrets exploitability
|
5 secrets types, all in common
|
|
AI
|
3 functions, 2 in common and 1
additional
|
3 functions, 2 in common and 1
additional
|
|
|
MCP
|
Yes
|
||
|
Open-source
|
Not applicable
|
Apache License version 2, partially
equivalent to the paid version
|
|
|
Provisioning as code
|
Yes
|
||
|
Deployment
|
SaaS (multi-tenant) +
on-premises (single-tenant)
|
||
| Regions |
AE, ANZ, EU, IN, IL, SG and US
|
||
|
Status
|
Yes
|
||
|
Incidents
|
7.6 per year
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Checkmarx
|
|
SCM
|
6, 3 in common and 3 additional
|
4, 3 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
Binary repositories
|
None
|
None
|
5
|
|
Ticketing
|
3, all in common
|
5, 3 in common and 2 additional
|
|
|
ChatOps
|
None |
None
|
2 |
|
IDE
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional
|
4, 2 in common and 2 additional
|
|
|
CI/CD
|
21, 10 in common and 11 additional
|
17, 10 in common and 7 additional
|
|
|
SCA
|
Native
|
||
|
Container
|
Native | ||
|
SAST
|
Native
|
||
|
DAST
|
Native powered by ZAP
|
||
|
IAST
|
None |
None
|
None
|
|
Cloud
|
3, all in common
|
3, all in common
|
|
|
CSPM
|
None | ||
|
Secrets
|
Native
|
||
|
Remediation
|
None
|
None
|
3
|
|
Bug bounty
|
None
|
None
|
None |
|
Vulnerability management
|
None
|
None
|
4
|
|
Compliance
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
The latest update to this comparison was on Dec 11, 2025. The primary sources of information
were checkmarx.com and docs.checkmarx.com, which were supplemented by specialized
information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Checkmarx
Free trial
Search for vulnerabilities in your apps for free with Fluid Attacks' automated security testing! Start
your 21-day free trial and discover the
benefits of the Continuous
Hacking Essential plan. If you prefer the
Advanced plan, which includes the expertise of Fluid Attacks' hacking team, fill out this contact form.