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
|
|||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Employees
|
|||
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
Maximum of 8.46 based on 149 reviews over 9 years from:
G2, Gartner Peer Insights, PeerSpot, Software Advice and TrustRadius.
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
||
|
Research Firms
|
None
|
None
|
|
|
Founded
|
2001 | ||
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
$92M USD in 4 rounds from 6 investors (3 Acquisitions)
|
|
Revenue
|
|||
|
CVE
|
257 CVEs reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10 CVE labs worldwide.
|
135 CVEs reported to MITRE.
|
|
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
||
|
Documentation
|
|||
|
Visits
|
|||
|
Authority
|
|||
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
Direct or with any of its 122 partners
|
|
| Marketplaces | AWS | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Free trial
|
|||
|
Demo
|
|||
|
Pricing
|
|||
|
Pricing drivers
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Checkmarx
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
Yes | No |
|
Secure code review
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Pivoting
|
No
|
Chains vulnerabilities to reveal new, higher-impact ones.
|
No
|
|
Exploitation
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Zero-day vulnerabilities
|
None
|
Zero-day vulnerability research continuously
|
Zero-day vulnerability research continuously
|
|
SLA
|
Availability and response | ||
|
Accreditations
|
|||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements from 65 standards, 19 in common and 46 additional.
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
20 standards, 19 in common and 1 additional.
|
|
Detection method
|
|||
|
False positives
|
4.87 times better
|
7.66 times better
|
12% F0.5 score per quantity
|
|
False negatives
|
6.61 time better
|
18.99 times better
|
4% F2.0 score per severity
|
|
Remediation
|
4 remediation options, 4 in common and 1 additional.
|
Same, plus 1 remediation option.
|
5 remediation options, 4 in common and 1 additional.
|
|
Outputs
|
5 formats, 4 in common and 1 additional.
|
Same, plus 2 formats.
|
6 formats, 4 in common and 2 additional.
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Checkmarx
|
|
ASPM
|
Yes | ||
|
IDE
|
3 functionalities, all in common.
|
3 functionalities, all in common.
|
|
|
CLI
|
|||
|
CI/CD
|
|||
|
SCA
|
|||
|
Reachability
|
5 languages, 3 in common and 2 additional.
|
No
|
|
|
SBOM
|
|||
|
Containers
|
|||
|
Source SAST (languages)
|
24 languages, 16 in common and 8 additional.
|
Same, plus others
|
|
|
Source SAST (frameworks)
|
20 frameworks, 10 in common and 10 additional.
|
Same, plus others
|
52 frameworks, 10 in common and 42 additional. |
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type of binary.
|
No
|
|
|
DAST
|
5 attack surfaces, 3 in common and 2 additional.
|
7 attack surfaces, 3 in common and 4 additional. |
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes |
No
|
|
|
Secrets
|
16 secrets types, 5 in common and 11 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.
|
|
|
Fast and automatic
|
|||
|
Open source
|
Not applicable
|
Apache License Version 2.0. Partially equivalent to the paid version.
|
|
|
Deployment
|
|||
| Regions | |||
|
Status
|
|||
|
Incidents
|
Pending
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Checkmarx
|
|
SCM integrations
|
4 integrations, 3 in common and 1 additional.
|
4 integrations, 3 in common and 1 additional.
|
|
|
Binary repositories integrations
|
None
|
None
|
5 integrations.
|
|
Ticketing integrations
|
3 integrations, all in common.
|
5 integrations, 3 in common and 2 additional. |
|
|
ChatOps integrations
|
None |
None
|
2 integrations. |
|
IDE integrations
|
4 integrations, 2 in common and 2 additional. |
||
|
CI/CD integrations
|
22 integrations, 14 in common and 8 additional.
|
17 integrations, 14 in common and 3 additional.
|
|
|
SCA integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed) |
|
|
Container integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed) |
|
|
SAST integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed) |
|
|
DAST integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed) |
|
|
IAST integrations
|
None |
None
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
|
Cloud Integrations
|
|||
|
CSPM integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
None | |
|
Secrets integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed) |
|
|
Compliance integrations
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
References were last checked on Sep 04, 2024.
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.