Acunetix vs OWASP Zap vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Invicti and OpenText are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #13 with an average rating of 8.3, while OpenText is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.0. Invicti holds a 3.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to OpenText’s 4.0% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 33 Acunetix reviews

6,393 Views
4,155 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Application S...

Read 60 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

7,934 Views
6,189 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

9,644 Views
8,776 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Acunetix

OpenText Core Application S...

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Acunetix, OpenText Core Application Security, and OWASP Zap based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST).

To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,825 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 3.5%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 4.0%, down from 4.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 4.6%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil

CEO at Xcelliti

Has enabled teams to improve security testing with smooth integration and high accuracy

Acunetix has a very good ratio of fewer false positives, so users don't need to retest everything. Acunetix operates smoothly with no interruptions required, and it performs at 100% efficiency without issues in scanning anything. The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities. Acunetix integrates with every type of tool, including CI/CD tools, offering 100% integration in DevOps environments. The main benefit of Acunetix is that at the first level, users can address security issues related to penetration testing, allowing them to expose vulnerabilities and ensure all required testing is completed with very few false positives.

Read full review

Jonathan Steyn

Principal Technical Consultant at EOH

Source code analyzer, FPR file generation, reduction of false positives and generates compliance reports, for in-depth analysis

Not challenges with the product itself. The product is very reliable. It does have a steep learning curve. But, again, one thing that Fortify or OpenText does very well is training. There are a lot of free resources and training in the community forums, free training as well as commercial training where users can train on how to use the back-end systems and the scanning engines and how to use command-line arguments because some of the procedures or some of the tools do require a bit of a learning curve. That's the only challenge I've really seen for customers because you have to learn how to use the tool effectively. But Fortify has, in fact, improved its user interface and the way users engage the dashboards and the interfaces. It is intuitive. It's easy to understand. But in some regards, the cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions. But from the point of the reliability index and how powerful the tool is, there's no challenge there. But it's just from a learning perspective; users might need a bit more skill to use the tool. The user interface isn't that tedious. It's not that difficult to understand. When I initially learned how to use the interfaces, I was able to master it within a week and was able to use it quite effectively. So training is required. All skills are needed to learn how to use the tool. I would like to see more enhancements in the dashboards. Dashboards are available. They do need some configuration and settings. But I would like to see more business intelligence capabilities within the tool. It's not particularly a cybersecurity function, but, for instance, business impact analysis or other features where you can actually use business intelligence capabilities within your security tool. That would be remarkable because not only do you have a cybersecurity tool, but you also have a tool that can give you business impact analysis and some other measurements. A bit more intelligence in terms of that from a cybersecurity perspective would be remarkable.

Read full review

Amit Beniwal

Project Manager at Al Hassan LLC

Simplifies vulnerability discovery and has high quality support

There are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores. Sometimes, a vulnerability initially categorized as high severity may be reduced to medium or low over time after security patches are applied. This alignment with the present severity score and CVSS score could be improved.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."

"It generates automated reports."

"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."

"The usability and overall scan results are good."

"Acunetix has an awesome crawler. It gives a referral site map of near targets and also goes really deep to find all the inputs without issues. This was valuable because it helped me find some files or directories, like web admin panels without authentication, which were hidden."

"The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code."

"The product is really easy to use."

"The scalability is good. The scalability is more than good because it can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated as part of applications. So that really makes it a very, very versatile solution to have."

More Acunetix pros

"The user interface is good."

"One of the valuable features is the ability to submit your code and have it run in the background. Then, if something comes up that is more specific, you have the security analyst who can jump in and help, if needed."

"One of the top features is the source code review for vulnerabilities. When we look at source code, it's hard to see where areas may be weak in terms of security, and Fortify on Demand's source code review helps with that."

"We identified a lot of security vulnerability much earlier in the development and could fix this well before the product was rolled out to a huge number of clients."

"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand is the information it can provide. There is quite a lot of information. It can pinpoint right down to where the problem is, allowing you to know where to fix it. Overall the features are easy to use, you don't have to be a coder. You can be a manager, or in IT operations, et cetera, anyone can use it. It is quite a well-rounded functional solution."

"While using Micro Focus Fortify on Demand we have been very happy with the results and findings."

"t's a cloud-based solution, so there was no installation involved."

"It is an extremely robust, scalable, and stable solution."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

"You can run it against multiple targets."

"The API is exceptional."

"The reporting is quite intuitive, which gives you a clear indication of what kind of vulnerability you have that you can drill down on to gather more information."

"I consider OWASP Zap to be the most effective solution overall; being open source allows integration with other systems via OWASP Zap APIs."

"The HUD is a good feature that provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."

"The solution is scalable."

"Simple to use, good user interface."

"The product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."

"It is difficult to create a proxy connection."

"The solution is generally stable, however, there might be room for improvement regarding glitches or bugs."

"It would be nice to have a feature to "retest" only a single vulnerability that the customer reports as patched, and delete it from the next scans since it has already been patched."

"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."

"The solution can be improved by adding the ability to scan subdomains automatically, and by providing reports that can be exported to external databases to share with other solutions."

"I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection."

"We want to see how much bandwidth usage it consumes. When we monitor traffic we have issues with the consumption and throttling of the traffic."

More Acunetix cons

"I would like to see improvement in CI integration and integration with GitLab or Jenkins. It needs to be more simple."

"There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify."

"The UI could be better. Fortify should also suggest new packages in the product that can be upgraded. Currently, it shows that, but it's not visible enough. In future versions, I would like more insights about the types of vulnerabilities and the pages associated with the exact CVE."

"We would like a reduction in the time frame of scans. It takes us three to five days to run a scan now. We would like that reduced to under three days."

"Fortify on Demand needs to improve its pricing."

"Takes up a lot of resources which can slow things down."

"The cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions."

"There are many false positives identified by the solution."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

"Sometimes, we get some false positives."

"The solution is somewhat unreliable because after we get the finding, we have to manually verify each of its findings to see whether it's a false positive or a true finding, and it takes time."

"Online documentation can be improved to utilize all features of ZAP and API methods to make use in automation."

"The forced browse has been incorporated into the program and it is resource-intensive."

"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."

"OWASP should work on reducing false positives by using AI and ML algorithms."

"I would like to see a version of “repeater” within OWASP ZAP, a tool capable of sending from one to 1000 of the same requests, but with preselected modified fields, changing from a predetermined word list, or manually created."

"Deployment is somewhat complicated."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When compared with other products, the pricing is a little bit high. But it gives value for the price. It serves the purpose and is worthwhile for the price we pay."

"The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable."

"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."

"The price is exceptionally high."

"When we looked at all other vendors and what they were asking for, to provide a third of what Acunetix was capable of doing, it was an easy decision... But now that it's coming to a cost where it's line with market value, it becomes more of a competition... Acunetix is raising the cost of licensing. It's 3.5 times what we were initially quoted."

"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."

"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."

"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."

"The subscription model, on a per-scan basis, is a bit expensive. That's another reason we are not using it for all the apps."

"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."

"It is cost-effective."

"The pricing model it's based on how many applications you wish to scan."

"The solution is a little expensive."

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."

"There are different costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand depending on the assessments you want to use. There is only a standard license needed to use the solution."

More OpenText Core Application Security pricing and cost advice

"It's free. It's good for us because we don't know what the extent of our use will be yet. It's good to start with something free and easy to use."

"This solution is open source and free."

"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."

"It's free and open, currently under the Apache 2 license. If ZAP does what you need it to do, selling a free solution is a very easy."

"The tool is open source."

"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."

"OWASP Zap is free to use."

"The solution’s pricing is high."

More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

860,825 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning t...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

Most of the customers who use Acunetix are looking for security testing. The primary use case is performing penetrati...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

Acunetix supports multi-user environments effectively. Acunetix is targeted for small to mid-size teams in a DevSecOp...

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

In comparison with other tools, they're competitive. It is not more expensive than other solutions, but their pricing...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify. One day it may pass a scan with no issues, and the ...

See all answers

Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?

OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available...

See all answers

What do you like most about OWASP Zap?

The best feature is the Zap HUD (Heads Up Display) because the customers can use the website normally. If we scan web...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OWASP Zap?

OWASP might be cost-effective, however, people prefer to use the free edition available as open source.

See all answers

Comparisons

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 11% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 9% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 7% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix

Compared 6% of the time

Tenable.io Web Application Scanning vs Acunetix

Compared 6% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 17% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 12% of the time

Coverity vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 11% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 11% of the time

HCL AppScan vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OWASP Zap

Compared 19% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap

Compared 11% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

Invicti vs OWASP Zap

Compared 4% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

July 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Application Security

June 2025

OpenText Core Application Security report

Download OpenText Core Application Security product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

June 2025

Download OWASP Zap product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand

No data available

Overview

Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner is an automated web application security testing tool that audits your web applications by checking for vulnerabilities like SQL Injection, Cross site scripting, and other exploitable vulnerabilities.

Invicti

OpenText Core Application Security offers robust features like static and dynamic scanning, real-time vulnerability tracking, and seamless integration with development platforms, designed to enhance code security and reduce operational costs.

OpenText Core Application Security is a cloud-based, on-demand service providing accurate and deep scanning capabilities with detailed reporting. Its integrations with development platforms ensure an enhanced security layer in the development lifecycle, benefiting users by lowering operational costs and facilitating efficient remediation. The platform addresses needs for intuitive interfaces, API support, and comprehensive vulnerability assessments, helping improve code security and accelerate time-to-market. Despite its strengths, challenges exist around false positives, report clarity, and language support, alongside confusing pricing and package options. Enhancements are sought in areas like CI/CD pipeline configuration, report visualization, scan times, and integration with third-party tools such as GitLab, container scanning, and software composition analysis.

What features define OpenText Core Application Security?

Static and Dynamic Scanning: Offers thorough analysis to identify vulnerabilities during development.
Real-time Vulnerability Tracking: Continuously updates and monitors potential security threats.
Seamless Development Platform Integration: Enhances security processes without disrupting workflows.
Cloud-Based Service: Provides flexible, on-demand security capabilities with accurate results.
API Support: Allows smooth integration and automation within existing systems.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Reduced Operational Costs: Optimizes resources by lowering costs associated with security management.
Efficient Remediation: Speeds up the process of identifying and resolving vulnerabilities.
Enhanced Code Security: Strengthens overall application security during the development lifecycle.
Accelerated Time-to-Market: Streamlines development stages by integrating essential security tools.

Industries like mobile applications, e-commerce, and banking leverage OpenText Core Application Security for its ability to identify vulnerabilities such as SQL injections. Integrating seamlessly with DevSecOps and security auditing processes, this tool supports developers in writing safer code, ensuring secure application deployment and enhancing software assurance.

OpenText

OWASP Zap is a free and open-source web application security scanner.

The solution helps developers identify vulnerabilities in their web applications by actively scanning for common security issues.

With its user-friendly interface and powerful features, Zap is a popular choice among developers for ensuring the security of their web applications.

OWASP

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.

1. Google 2. Microsoft 3. IBM 4. Amazon 5. Facebook 6. Twitter 7. LinkedIn 8. Netflix 9. Adobe 10. PayPal 11. Salesforce 12. Cisco 13. Oracle 14. Intel 15. HP 16. Dell 17. VMware 18. Symantec 19. McAfee 20. Citrix 21. Red Hat 22. Juniper Networks 23. SAP 24. Accenture 25. Deloitte 26. Ernst & Young 27. PwC 28. KPMG 29. Capgemini 30. Infosys 31. Wipro 32. TCS

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

June 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,825 professionals have used our research since 2012.