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 8.4, while OpenText is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.0. Invicti holds a 2.5% mindshare in AS, compared to OpenText’s 3.9% 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

5,850 Views
2,808 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Application S...

Read 60 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

6,920 Views
5,121 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Acunetix

OpenText Core Application S...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

Acunetix and OpenText Core Application Security are competitors in the field of application security testing. Based on feature robustness and integration capabilities, OpenText Core Application Security appears to have the upper hand.

Features: Acunetix provides robust automated security testing featuring vulnerability scanning and an interactive application security testing module that enhances discovery of vulnerabilities. It includes a scheduling feature for scans and tailored attack parameterization. OpenText Core Application Security excels in application and source code scanning, dynamic testing, and its seamless integration within the DevOps cycle, which supports continuous security improvements.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix could improve its IAS tool, expand on OWASP Top Ten vulnerabilities, and make its advanced scan settings more user-friendly. It also faces challenges with false positives and report export functionality. OpenText Core Application Security requires enhancements in reducing false positives, speeding up dynamic scan capabilities, and offering better CI/CD tool integration alongside more comprehensive reporting options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix offers flexibility in deployment on-premises, in clouds, or hybrid setups but faces issues with slow customer support. OpenText Core Application Security also offers varied deployment options but stands out slightly for more responsive and helpful customer service when reached, although still reliant on ticket systems.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix, once known for its value, now struggles with competitive pricing due to recent increases, making it less cost-effective, although ROI remains satisfactory for some. OpenText Core Application Security, while moderately priced, is valued for its feature-rich offering and integration capabilities, reflecting its strong ROI in security posture improvements rather than direct cost savings.

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

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 868,706 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)

12th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Vulnerability Management (21st), DevSecOps (6th)

OpenText Core Application S...

Ranking in Application Security Tools

14th

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

13th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.5%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.9%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Core Application Security	3.9%
Acunetix	2.5%
Other	93.6%

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 can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."

"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 solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities."

"I find it to be one of the most comprehensive tools, with support for manual intervention."

"The features of Acunetix have proved most effective in identifying vulnerabilities."

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

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the speed at which it can scan multiple domains in just a few hours."

More Acunetix pros

"The features that I have found most valuable include its security scan, the vulnerability finds, and the web interface to search and review the issues."

"It is valuable in improving our overall security posture by catching significant errors."

"What stands out to me is the user-friendliness of each feature."

"The most important feature of the product is to follow today's technology fast, updated rules and algorithms (of the product)."

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

"The SAST feature is the most valuable."

"Each bank may have its own core banking applications with proprietary support for different programming languages. This makes Fortify particularly relevant and advantageous in those cases."

"The most valuable feature is the capacity to be able to check vulnerabilities during the development process. The development team can check whether the code they are using is vulnerable to some type of attack or there is some type of vulnerability so that they can mitigate it. It helps us in achieving a more secure approach towards internal applications. It is an intuitive solution. It gives all the information that a developer needs to remediate a vulnerability in the coding process. It also gives you some examples of how to remediate a vulnerability in different programming languages. This solution is pretty much what we were searching for."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

"The jargon used makes it difficult for project managers to understand the issues, and the technical explanations used make it difficult for developers to understand issues. These things should be simplified much more. That would be very helpful for us when explaining to them what needs to be fixed. The report output needs to be simplified."

"There is room for improvement in the pricing."

"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."

"I rate its stability six out of ten."

"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."

"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."

"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."

"You can't actually change your password after you've set it unless you go back into the administration account and you change it there. Thus, if you're locked out and don't remember your password, that's a thing."

More Acunetix cons

"It does scanning for all virtual machines and other things, but it doesn't do the scanning for containers. It currently lacks the ability to do the scanning on containers. We're asking their product management team to expand this capability to containers."

"New technologies and DevOps could be improved. Fortify on Demand can be slow (slower than other vendors) to support new technologies or new software versions."

"There's a bit of a learning curve. Our development team is struggling with following the rules and following the new processes."

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

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

"The Visual Studio plugin seems to hang when a scan is run on big projects. I would expect some improvements there."

"There is room for improvement in the integration process."

"Fortify on Demand needs to improve its pricing."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"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 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."

"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."

"The price is exceptionally high."

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

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

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."

"Despite being on the higher end in terms of cost, the biggest value lies in its abilities, including robust features, seamless integration, and high-quality findings."

"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."

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

"It is not more expensive than other solutions, but the pricing is competitive."

"Buying a license would be feasible for regular use. For intermittent use, the cloud-based option can be used (Fortify on Demand)."

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

"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."

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

868,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

University

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	14

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	16
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	43

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 9% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 8% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 8% of the time

Veracode vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 16% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 13% of the time

Coverity Static vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 9% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 7% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

September 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Application Security

September 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

September 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: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

868,706 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.