An explicit evidence level
Findings tell detected, reachable and confirmed apart. A reachable flow carries a witness anchored in the code, and a confirmation shows where it comes from: a pentester, a runtime test or DAST.
Tamis vs Checkmarx One
Checkmarx One targets large organisations, on quote, as SaaS or on premises. Tamis offers both modes with a SaaS run at OVHcloud or Scaleway in the European Union, public prices, and risks and evidence tracked project by project.
Updated 9 October 2026 · by the Tamis team
Written by the vendor of Tamis, from Checkmarx One's public documentation (sources below). Method and full comparison.
Why choose Tamis
- SaaS run by a European host
- AI fixes re-scanned before the PR
- Risks and evidence per project
Comparison
Reachability scopes differ across vendors (method, languages). “Partly”: open-source engine, proprietary platform.
| Criterion | Tamis | Checkmarx One |
|---|---|---|
| What is scanned | ||
| Code (SAST) | Yes | Yes |
| Dependencies (SCA) | Yes | Yes |
| Secrets | Yes | Yes, Enterprise |
| Infrastructure as code | Yes | Yes, Enterprise |
| Containers | Yes | Yes, Professional |
| Deployed app (DAST) | Yes | Yes, Professional |
| SBOM export | Yes | Yes |
| License policies | Yes | Not established |
| Prioritisation | ||
| Dependency reachability | Yes, 8 ecosystems | Yes, 4 languages |
| AI fixes | Yes | Yes |
| Import from other tools | Yes, SARIF and 4 formats | Yes, SARIF |
| Correlation | ||
| Deduplication across scanners | Yes | Grouping announced, ASPM |
| Code linked to the deployed app (SAST and DAST) | In development | Not established |
| Attack chains across findings | Yes, MITRE ATT&CK | Not established |
| One flaw, every affected project | Yes | Not established |
| Hosting | ||
| SaaS in the EU | Yes | Yes |
| Whole platform on premises | Yes | Yes, announced |
| Scanner on your side, SaaS results | In development | Not established |
| Open-source engine | Partly | Not established |
| Governance | ||
| SSO | Yes | Yes |
| Reports per framework | Yes | Yes |
| Risks and evidence per project | Yes | Not established |
| Beyond scanning | ||
| Threat modelling (DFD, STRIDE) | Yes | Via SD Elements, partner |
| Architecture linked to findings | Yes, C4 and DFD | Not established |
| Manual pentest tracking (WSTG, ASVS) and report | Yes | Not established |
| Autonomous AI pentesting | Yes | Not established |
| Retest of a fixed finding | Yes, supported scanners | Not established |
| EBIOS RM workshops | Yes | Not established |
What Tamis does differently
AI fixes that are re-scanned
For supported cases, the proposed fix is re-scanned on a copy of the code to check that the targeted finding is gone. The pull request only opens behind an approval bound to that fix.
Your data, your AI
A local model can give the first triage verdict; the cloud provider is optional and chosen by your administrators. Every suggestion stays a proposal until you decide.
One vulnerability, every affected application
When a shared component is vulnerable, Tamis shows the projects that use it and tracks, project by project, the decision, the fix and its evidence. The same risks and evidence feed your NIS2, DORA or ISO 27001 files.
SaaS at OVHcloud or Scaleway or on premises
SaaS run at OVHcloud or Scaleway in the European Union, or the whole platform on your infrastructure, air-gapped included.
Keep your current scanners
SARIF, Snyk, SonarQube, Nessus and Qualys reports are imported and tracked with the rest, without replacing what already works.
Questions
Can both be installed on premises?
Yes. Check the exact scope with each vendor.
Are prices public?
For Tamis, yes: pricing page. For Checkmarx, no: quote after a demo.
How can I judge Tamis on my code?
With the free 14-day POC: three projects of your choice, and success criteria agreed together before the first scan.