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

Check Point CloudGuard Code Security 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

Check Point CloudGuard Code...
Ranking in DevSecOps
9th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (27th)
OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Ranking in DevSecOps
8th
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 May 2026, in the DevSecOps category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is 3.4%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 7.3%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
DevSecOps Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing7.3%
Check Point CloudGuard Code Security3.4%
Other89.3%
DevSecOps
 

Featured Reviews

Mamadou Fallou Diagne - PeerSpot reviewer
IT security and network analyst at Revenu Québec
Management team gains substantial protection while navigating ongoing configuration challenges
The most valuable features of Check Point CloudGuard Code Security include our approach to manage it via the management we have on-premises, and we also deploy the same extension management of CloudGuard to manage all the virtual systems on Azure. We effectively use artificial intelligence with Check Point CloudGuard Code Security, as we have teams that work with AI and we frequently manage our firewalls using AI along with the CloudGuard and all virtual systems.
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

"We have a strong sense of security assurance when utilizing CloudGuard, as it consistently delivers outstanding protection capabilities."
"I can recommend Check Point CloudGuard Code Security to other organizations as it is a good platform to protect our organization."
"Automation has helped a lot to identify and automatically execute policies, rules, and blocks due to its machine learning."
"It helped us to reduce vulnerabilities."
"We have had a number of real events where developers accidentally made commits of API keys, and we were able to detect and begin response actions in minutes. We had the API key revoked in less than five minutes in such events."
"The implementation of this tool for security management and control is very simple."
"Knowing what measures we must take allows us to reduce costs associated with security in the cloud by providing early identification of a risk or a possible security breach."
"Having a cloud detection response helps to very quickly identify security threats in our environment."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."
"The feature that has been most influential in identifying vulnerabilities is its ability to crawl the website, understand the structure, and analyze the network packets sent and received."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."
"It is easy to use, and its reporting is fairly simple."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"The most valuable feature is the performance."
 

Cons

"They could include web functionalities such as sandboxing."
"The enhancements are needed in the logging system and log management processes."
"The ease of use could be better."
"The costs are not transparent."
"I am satisfied with the performance and results enhanced by this product since we deployed it."
"The solution should improve false-positives."
"There are a lot of opportunities for how they can use their technology to do more. That would be more like sensitive data discovery and other things besides Git Repos, but then you are expanding the scope of what necessarily their product is."
"We need to have many of the baselines or development guides providing less complex writing or development."
"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."
"The solution is on the expensive side. It's something that clients comment on."
"This solution is very expensive."
"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."
"I want to enhance automation. Currently, Fortify WebInspect can scan and find vulnerabilities, but users with specific skills need to interpret the results and understand how to address them."
"We have often encountered scanning errors."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is extremely affordable and high value for cost."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"The price is okay."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which DevSecOps solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Security Firm
17%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Spectral?
There are still areas for improvement with Check Point CloudGuard Code Security. All the features we have on the firewall on the on-premises side, we also have under CloudGuard such as IPS, Anti-Bo...
What is your primary use case for Spectral?
My team and I work with Check Point CloudGuard Code Security and handle all related tasks, including deploying virtual machines and configuring all aspects. Our security team's roles include networ...
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

Spectral
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Doddle, Bangalore International Airport, Grupo financiero ACOBO, DigitalTrack
Aaron's
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard Code Security vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.