Every category where a model named Checkmarx Codebashing for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant	Since September 2026
Secure code training	Developer platform	0%	23 of 97	11%	9	under 10 labels · led by SecureFlag at 26%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Checkmarx Codebashing yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment and per category, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Checkmarx Codebashing across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.

ShowHide

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	1	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	1	0	0	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	1	1	2
Mistral Small	0	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	0	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	0	1
Kimi K2	1	0	0	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	1	0	0	1
MiniMax M2.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-6 Luna	0	0	0	0
Muse Glimmer 30B	0	0	0	0

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct7 labelsNone

Paraphrase2 labels1

Comparative9 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained1 labelNone

Negative5 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative27 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 1 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Best If You Already Use Checkmarx One ... Caveat: Most effective if you're already invested in the Checkmarx ecosystem.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Secure code training · direct prompt · alternative

“Choose Snyk Learn or Checkmarx Codebashing if you want frictionless, "just-in-time" learning” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Secure code training · comparative prompt · alternative

“provides excellent hands‑on code‑review and immersive learning experiences” GLM 4.7 FlashX · Secure code training · comparative prompt · alternative

“Strong workflow integration and remediation guidance from real findings” Perplexity Sonar · Secure code training · comparative prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

“Avoid high-end like Synopsys or Checkmarx Codebashing ($1K+/user or bundled).” Grok 4.1 Fast · Secure code training · budget prompt · hard negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Checkmarx Codebashing, over the 27 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Checkmarx Codebashing was named but was not.

ShowHide

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

SecureFlag24 of 278Not among the top eight

Secure Code Warrior23 of 2712Not among the top eight

Security Journey15 of 272Not among the top eight

Veracode Security Labs14 of 270Not among the top eight

SafeStack Academy10 of 271Not among the top eight

AppSecEngineer7 of 270Not among the top eight

CMD+CTRL Training6 of 270Not among the top eight

Avatao5 of 271Not among the top eight

Black Duck Polaris Platform5 of 270Not among the top eight

SANS5 of 270Not among the top eight

A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Checkmarx Codebashing. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 26 of the 27 answers that named Checkmarx Codebashing and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

ransomleak.com19

g2.com18

gartner.com17

sourceforge.net16

securityjourney.com15

securecodewarrior.com12

secureflag.com11

us.fitgap.com11

checkmarx.comYour site10

f6s.com10

129 of the 139 domain citations in answers naming Checkmarx Codebashing came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

ransomleak.com/blog/best-secure-coding-training-202618

gartner.com/reviews/market/secure-code-training-tools17

g2.com/categories/secure-code-training10

securityjourney.com/secure-development-training10

secureflag.com/training9

sourceforge.net/software/secure-code-training9

checkmarx.com/product/codebashing-secure-code-training8

f6s.com/software/category/secure-coding-training8

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Search and answers

checkmarx.com ranks 3 on Google for the category's searches. In the answers, Checkmarx Codebashing takes 0% of first choices and SecureFlag takes 26%.

ShowHide

In search

Google, US estimates

Position for “secure code training platform”

–

not in the top ten

Position for “secure code training platforms”

–

not in the top ten

Searches for its name, Google: 30 a month (“checkmarx codebashing”)
AI search demand for its name, est.: 1 a month
Its company's site: checkmarx.com shared with Checkmarx's other products; the figures are the site's
Organic visits to its site: about 54,982 a month
Searches its site ranks for: 2,927 · 204 in the top three
Sites linking to it: 6,902
Paid Google search: No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none

Ads on GoogleDetailLess

85 ads · 54 image, 30 text, 1 video · 61 shown in the last 30 days

First shown January 2025, as Checkmarx ltd, verified. Ads started 2025-10 to 2026-09: 77 in the year, 8 before.

On Google's pages: 1 2 3 4

In answers

This edition

Share of first choices

rank 23 of 97 in secure code training

Segment leader

26%

SecureFlag

First choices: 1 across its categories
Named in: 27 answers
Its own site cited: in 26 of the answers that named it

Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.

Follow Checkmarx Codebashing

An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.

Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.

The company

Checkmarx is the company behind Checkmarx Codebashing.

ShowHide

On record

Company records

Also from Checkmarx: Checkmarx ASPM, Checkmarx DAST, Checkmarx One, Checkmarx One ASPM, Checkmarx SCA

In its own words

Stated by the vendor, not checked

Positioning: Application security training for developers, by developers.
devhub.checkmarx.com/tool/codebashing
For: developers
devhub.checkmarx.com/tool/codebashing
Free plan or trial: Get your free custom demo now checkmarx.com/product/codebashing-secure-code-training
Certifications: SOC 2 Type II CertifiediISO/IEC 27001:2013 Certified
Not stated on the pages read: Price, starting price, integrations, hosting, customers

What Checkmarx Codebashing's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: devhub.checkmarx.com/tool/codebashing, checkmarx.com/product/codebashing-secure-code-training, docs.checkmarx.com/en/34965-167849-codebashing-2-0.html, docs.checkmarx.com/en/34965-15652-what-is-codebashing.html, docs.checkmarx.com/en/34965-15304-checkmarx-codebashing.html. A claimed page can correct any of them.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Checkmarx Codebashing's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Checkmarx Codebashing, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives

A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for Checkmarx Codebashing by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:

where Checkmarx Codebashing is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
who was chosen in the answers that did not name Checkmarx Codebashing, and every reason the record gives;
a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.