No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

Aqua Cloud Security Platform
Ranking in DevSecOps
9th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Cloud and Data Center Security (11th), Container Security (14th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (15th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (13th), Software Supply Chain Security (7th)
OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Ranking in DevSecOps
10th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the DevSecOps category, the mindshare of Aqua Cloud Security Platform is 4.1%, up from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 6.7%, down from 6.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
DevSecOps Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Aqua Cloud Security Platform4.1%
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing6.7%
Other89.2%
DevSecOps
 

Featured Reviews

Samir Paul - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Practitioner at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Secures cloud workloads from build to runtime and has needed simpler setup and alert tuning
Regarding how Aqua Cloud Security Platform can be improved, the first area is the complex initial setup. Deployment and configuration can be complex, especially in large environments that require skilled resources. For Kubernetes environments, initial onboarding and policy setup takes time. Compared to Wiz onboarding, it is not very straightforward, as I have also worked with Wiz. The UI is powerful but not very simple for new users, as navigation and dashboard can be overwhelming. Alert noise and tuning are required because Aqua generates a large number of initial alerts that need tuning to reduce false positives. Additionally, pricing can be high depending on workload scale, especially for large Kubernetes and multi-cloud environments. For improvements to Aqua Cloud Security Platform, I think better integration with SOAR and XDR platforms, more AI-driven prioritization, and providing simpler out-of-the-box policies would be beneficial.
AP
Cyber Security Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Enhancements in manual testing align with reporting and integration features
WebInspect works efficiently with Java-based or .NET based applications. However, it struggles with Salesforce applications, where it requires approximately 20-24 hours to crawl and audit but produces minimal findings, necessitating manual verification. The solution offers customization features for crawling and vulnerability detection. It includes various security frameworks and allows selection of specific vulnerability types to audit, such as OWASP Top 10 or JavaScript-based vulnerabilities. When working with APIs, we can select OWASP API Top 10. The tool also supports custom audit features by combining different security frameworks. For on-premises deployment, the setup is complex, particularly regarding SQL server configuration. Unlike Burp Suite or OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, which have simpler setup processes, WebInspect requires SQL server setup to function.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"From what I understand, the initial setup is simple."
"Aqua Cloud Security Platform positively impacted my organization by allowing deployment from code to cloud in the entire CI/CD pipeline, with excellent capabilities and recent AI application security that is useful in the DevSecOps platform."
"The solution was very user-friendly."
"The CSPM product is great at securing our cloud accounts and I really like the runtime protection for containers and functions too."
"My advice would be to go for it."
"Their sandboxing service is also really good."
"The most valuable feature is the security."
"We find the Docker and Kubernetes support for container security most valuable."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities and is better at it than other products."
"Easy to scan and then share scan reports, it has definitely streamlined many processes."
"The FPA and Audit Workbench are very helpful for me, and when we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities, with very detailed examples for each vulnerability, so it is very good for users and beginners and doesn't take a lot of time to understand the tool."
"With it, you get a centralized board, you have a management view, enroll management and access management, everything is there."
"The product is a good option for enterprise-level organizations."
"There are lots of small settings and tools, like an HTTP editor, that are very useful."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
 

Cons

"The integrations on CICD could be improved. If Aqua had more plugins or container images to integrate and automate more easily on CICD, it would be better."
"Aqua Security lacks a lot in reporting."
"We would like to see an improvement in the overview visibility that this solution offers."
"It's a bit hard to use the user roles. That was a bit confusing."
"Aqua Security could provide more open documentation so that their learning resources can be more easily accessed and searched through online. Right now, a lot of the documentation is closed and not available to the public."
"Aqua Cloud Security Platform could improve by streamlining the onboarding process and initial policy tuning to reduce the feeling of exhaustion or fatigue."
"The user interface could be improved, especially in terms of organization and clarity."
"When I used it on the client that I had a few years ago, we ran into some issues where it would not load properly."
"My advice to others using Fortify WebInspect is not to use it, there are better solutions in the market."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
"The scanner could be better."
"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."
"The solution needs better integration with Microsoft's Azure Cloud or an extension of Azure DevOps. In fact, it should better integrate with any cloud provider. Right now, it's quite difficult to integrate with that solution, from the cloud perspective."
"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."
"The initial setup was complex."
"Not sufficiently compatible with some of our systems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Dealing with licensing costs isn't my responsibility, but I know that the licenses don't depend on the number of users, but instead are priced according to your workload."
"Aqua Security is not cheap, and it's not very expensive, such as Splunk, they are in the middle."
"It comes at a reasonable cost."
"They were reasonable with their pricing. They were pretty down-to-earth about the way they pitched their product and the way they tried to close the deal. They were one of the rare companies that approached the whole valuation in a way that made sense for our company, for our needs, and for their own requirements as well... They will accommodate your needs if they are able to understand them and they're stated clearly."
"The pricing of this solution could be improved."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"This solution is very expensive."
"Its price is almost similar to the price of AppScan. Both of them are very costly. Its price could be reduced because it can be very costly for unlimited IT scans, etc. I'm not sure, but it can go up to $40,000 to $50,000 or more than that."
"The price is okay."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which DevSecOps solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What do you think of Aqua Security vs Prisma Cloud?
Aqua Security is easy to use and very manageable. Its main focus is on Kubernetes and Docker. Security is a very valuable feature and their speed of integration is very good. The initial setup was ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Aqua Security?
Compared to other vendors, Aqua Cloud Security Platform's pricing is good or lesser. The pricing part is acceptable, and ease of use, as well as DevSecOps integration, is excellent.
What needs improvement with Aqua Security?
I think Aqua Cloud Security Platform has a good, strong platform, but there are still other areas. For example, if we compare it with Prisma Cloud or Wiz, I can see that with the initial deployment...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?
While I am not directly involved with licensing, I can share that our project's license for 1-9 applications costs between $15,000 to $19,000. In comparison, Burp Suite costs approximately $500 to ...
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
WebInspect works efficiently with Java-based or .NET based applications. However, it struggles with Salesforce applications, where it requires approximately 20-24 hours to crawl and audit but produ...
What is your primary use case for Fortify WebInspect?
I am currently working with several tools. For Fortify, I use SCA and WebInspect. Apart from that, I use Burp Suite from PortSwigger. For API testing, I use Postman with Burp Suite or WebInspect fo...
 

Also Known As

Aqua Security Platform, CloudSploit, Argon
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

HPE Salesforce Telstra Ellie Mae Cathay Pacific HomeAway
Aaron's
Find out what your peers are saying about Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.