Acunetix vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Invicti and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Invicti is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.3, while OpenText is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.0. Invicti holds a 2.9% mindshare in AS, compared to OpenText’s 4.3% 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

3,124 Views
2,460 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Application S...

Read 60 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

5,912 Views
4,419 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Acunetix

OpenText Core Application S...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

Acunetix and OpenText Core Application Security are both leading products in the web application security market. OpenText Core has a slight advantage due to its strong integration with the DevOps lifecycle and detailed static code analysis.

Features: Acunetix is noted for its web-based features, fast scanning, and customizable reports with its Interactive Application Security Testing module. It includes scheduled scans and superior reporting capabilities with deep penetration testing and cross-site scripting vulnerability identification. OpenText Core Application Security offers comprehensive insights via concurrent source and dynamic code scanning, supporting broad language compatibility and detailed reports, making it a strong candidate for DevOps processes.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix users seek enhancements in the Interactive Application Security Testing module, reduction of false positives, and broader scan capabilities, including mobile environments. OpenText Core could benefit from enhanced runtime analysis, reduced false positives, and expanded integration with development tools. Users request more intuitive dashboards and quicker technical support response times.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both Acunetix and OpenText offer deployment flexibility for on-premises, cloud, and hybrid environments. Acunetix's customer service receives mixed reviews, with some users experiencing delays, while OpenText users find support generally active and responsive, although deployment complexity could be simplified.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix has experienced significant pricing increases, leading some users to question its cost-effectiveness, historically offering competitive pricing and ROI. OpenText Core operates on a subscription model, perceived as moderately priced, providing good ROI through robust features, although users desire more flexible pricing.

To learn more, read our detailed Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 857,688 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:

Categories and Ranking

Acunetix

Ranking in Application Security Tools

16th

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

13th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Vulnerability Management (22nd), DevSecOps (6th)

OpenText Core Application S...

Ranking in Application Security Tools

14th

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.9%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 4.3%, down from 5.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools

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

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."

"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."

"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."

"It generates automated reports."

"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."

"The solution is highly stable."

"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."

"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."

More Acunetix pros

"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."

"The feature that I find the most useful is being able to just see the vulnerabilities online while checking the code and then checking suggestions for fixing them."

"Micro Focus WebInspect and Fortify code analysis tools are fully integrated with SSC portals and can instantly register to error tracking systems, like TFS and JIRA."

"Fortify on Demand can be scaled very easily."

"The solution is user-friendly. One feature I find very effective is the tool's automatic scanning capability. It scans replicas of the code developers write and automatically detects any vulnerabilities. The integration with CI/CD tools is also useful for plugins."

"I use the solution in my company for security code scans."

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

"It's a stable and scalable solution."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

"It is difficult to create a proxy connection."

"The only problem that they have is the price. It is a bit expensive, and you cannot change the number of applications for the whole year."

"In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us."

"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."

"Integration into other tools is very limited for Acunetix. While we're trying to incorporate a CI/CD process where we're integrating with JIRA and we're integrating with Jenkins and Chef, it becomes problematic. Other tools give you a high integration capability to connect into different solutions that you may already have, like JIRA."

"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."

"Acunetix should improve by further reducing false positives and providing more customized reports, plus better integration with newer tools such as GitHub and Azure DevOps."

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

More Acunetix cons

"Fortify on Demand needs to improve its pricing."

"They could provide features for artificial intelligence similar to other vendors."

"The technical support is actually a problem that needs to be addressed. Since the acquisition and merger with Hewlett Packard, it has been really hard to know who the technical or salesperson to talk to."

"They have very good support, but there is always room for improvement."

"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."

"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."

"During development, when our developer makes changes to their code, they typically use GitHub or GitLab to track those changes. However, proper integration between Fortify on Demand and GitHub and GitLab is not there yet. Improved integration would be very valuable to us."

"This solution would be improved if the code-quality perspective were added to it, on top of the security aspect."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."

"Implementing Acunetix needs a medium or larger business agency, because you need some money to get Acunetix. It is costly, but if you care about your agency's security, then maybe it's a cost that might help you in the future."

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

"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."

"It is a bit expensive. If you need to check five applications, you have to pay almost 14,000. It is an agreement for two years at 7,000 per year for only five applications. You cannot change the applications in the license. So, you are stuck with the same license for the five applications for one full year."

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

"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

"It is cost-effective."

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

"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."

"Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."

"If I exceed one million lines of code, there might be an extra cost or a change in the pricing bracket."

"The pricing can be improved because it is complex when compared to the competition."

"We are still using the trial version at this point but I can already see from the trial version alone that it is a good product. For others, I would say that Fortify on Demand might look expensive at the beginning, but it is very powerful and so you shouldn't be put off by the price."

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

More OpenText Core Application Security pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

20%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

11%

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 time depends on the application's code.

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 penetration testing. The main use cases include vulnerability scanning, security testing,...

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 DevSecOps environment, making it the best choice for small and mid-size companies, offer...

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 is competitive. The licenses for Fortify On Demand are generally bought in unit...

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 next day, without any code changes, it will report vulnerabilities such as passw...

See all answers

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 17% of the time

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

More Acunetix Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 18% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 13% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 12% of the time

Coverity vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 11% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 8% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

June 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

Also Known As

AcuSensor

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand

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

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.

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security

June 2025

Free Report: Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security

Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.