Suggestions appear as you type. Use the up and down arrows to choose one and Enter to open it.

This page's audience our own tag's counts — open to see them
–Visits
–Page views
–Clicks to vendors
–Time on page
–Reading now
Clicks to vendors, by tool
  • –
Top countries
  • –
Devices
  • –

– · visits, page views and clicks counted by our own tag, which counts more than our checked analytics; every figure rounded down · how we count

Head-to-head · Static Application Security Testing Sast

Checkmarx SAST vs GitHub CodeQL

  • Updated Oct 2026
  • Both researched from official sources
  • 3 checks side by side
Higher score Checkmarx SAST #1 in Static Application Security Testing Sast 9.3/10 Pricing on request ✓ 0 of 4 features Visit Checkmarx
GitHub CodeQL #6 in Static Application Security Testing Sast 8.6/10 Free plan Free plan✓ 2 of 4 features Visit GitHub CodeQL

Checkmarx SAST leads on 0 checks, GitHub CodeQL on 0, and 3 are even. Who comes out ahead on the 3 yes/no, price and count checks where we have data for both products. The editor score weighs everything else too.

Our verdict

  • Highest scoreCheckmarx SAST · 9.3/10
  • Free planonly GitHub CodeQL
  • Most featuresGitHub CodeQL · 2 of 4

Checkmarx SAST scores higher on our rubric for static application security testing sast: 9.3 against 8.6 out of 10; our editors rank them #1 and #6.

Checkmarx SAST is the better fit for enterprise teams needing broad SAST coverage. GitHub CodeQL is the better fit for gitHub-centered teams wanting semantic scanning.

  • Checkmarx SAST fits best

    Enterprise teams needing broad SAST coverage

  • GitHub CodeQL fits best

    GitHub-centered teams wanting semantic scanning

Advertiser disclosure: iTechGuides is reader-supported. Vendors can pay for top positions in our rankings and for a place on other products' pages, and we may earn a commission when you click some links. Bought places stand at the number bought; this page and our disclosure say so. Paying vendors may get a fuller, more detailed review from our editors, and that review can change their score. How we rank.

Side by side

Feature Checkmarx SAST 9.3/10 Visit ↗ GitHub CodeQL 8.6/10 Visit ↗
At a glance
Editor score 9.3 8.6
Ranking #1 in Static Application Security Testing Sast #6 in Static Application Security Testing Sast
Best for Enterprise teams needing broad SAST coverage GitHub-centered teams wanting semantic scanning
Pricing model Paid Free plan + paid
Starting price Pricing on request $30/user/mo
Free plan Not checked yet ✓ (best)
Free trial — —
Deployment Cloud, Self-hosted Cloud, Desktop
Platforms Web, Windows, Linux Web, Windows, macOS, Linux
Support Docs, Tickets Docs
Integrations 40+ integrations 4 integrations
Built for Enterprise, Mid-market Small business, Mid-market, Enterprise
Features Checkmarx SAST 0/4 · GitHub CodeQL 2/4
IDE integration Not checked yet Not checked yet
CI/CD integration Not checked yet ✓ (best)
Custom rules Not checked yet ✓ (best)
Pull request scanning Not checked yet Not checked yet
Specs
Languages supported Not checked yet 11 languages
Deployment Not checked yet Not checked yet
Our review
Pros
  • Analyzes source code and data flows without requiring compilation
  • Supports custom security queries, vulnerability triage, and fix guidance
  • Connects with major CI/CD services and IDEs, including GitHub and VS Code
  • Uses database-based semantic analysis, including data-flow and taint analysis.
  • Supports custom CodeQL queries and standard query and library packs.
  • Runs pull-request scans through GitHub code scanning and GitHub Actions or external CI.
Cons
  • Pricing requires a custom sales quote
  • Static analysis does not include software composition analysis
  • Hybrid deployment and query customization may exceed smaller teams' needs
  • Free use is limited to research and open-source codebases.
  • Commercial GitHub Code Security starts at $30 per active committer monthly.
  • Published support channels are documentation.
Our verdict

Checkmarx SAST analyzes application source code for security vulnerabilities, compliance issues, and business-logic flaws. It is aimed at enterprise and mid-market teams that need security analysis in development workflows, including teams…

Read the review →

CodeQL is GitHub’s semantic static-analysis engine for finding vulnerabilities, errors, and data-flow problems in source code. It represents a codebase as a database and runs queries against it, making it suited to teams that want to…

Read the review →
  1. Checkmarx SASTStatic Application Security Testing Sast 9.3Pricing on request
  2. GitHub CodeQLStatic Application Security Testing Sast 8.6Free plan

Strengths and trade-offs

  • Checkmarx SAST — where it wins

    • Analyzes source code and data flows without requiring compilation
    • Supports custom security queries, vulnerability triage, and fix guidance
    • Connects with major CI/CD services and IDEs, including GitHub and VS Code

    Where it doesn't

    • Pricing requires a custom sales quote
    • Static analysis does not include software composition analysis
    • Hybrid deployment and query customization may exceed smaller teams' needs

  • GitHub CodeQL — where it wins

    • Uses database-based semantic analysis, including data-flow and taint analysis.
    • Supports custom CodeQL queries and standard query and library packs.
    • Runs pull-request scans through GitHub code scanning and GitHub Actions or external CI.

    Where it doesn't

    • Free use is limited to research and open-source codebases.
    • Commercial GitHub Code Security starts at $30 per active committer monthly.
    • Published support channels are documentation.
  • Checkmarx SAST9.3/10 · Pricing on request

    Broad source analysis with custom queries and remediation guidance for enterprise teams.

    Visit CheckmarxFull verdict →
  • GitHub CodeQL8.6/10 · Free plan

    Semantic SAST with custom queries and pull-request alerts, tied to GitHub Code Security for paid use.

    Visit GitHub CodeQLFull verdict →

More comparisons

All static application security testing sast comparisons → · Full ranking →

Reviewed by iTechGuides Editors · Editorial team · Updated Oct 2026

Last updated · How we research and update