Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Check Point CloudGuard Code Security vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (15th)
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) (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the DevSecOps category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is 1.9%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 5.7%, down from 8.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
DevSecOps Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Check Point CloudGuard Code Security1.9%
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing5.7%
Other92.4%
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 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."
"It helped us to reduce vulnerabilities."
"You can maintain a legal framework structure at all times."
"Compared to what we used before, it's helping us to be more efficient in managing our traffic."
"Automation has helped a lot to identify and automatically execute policies, rules, and blocks due to its machine learning."
"I can recommend Check Point CloudGuard Code Security to other organizations as it is a good platform to protect our organization."
"Its fastest and most outstanding characteristic is ensuring a development line that will not lead to applying applications or code development."
"The data center security system has provided real-time analytics on performance and data configuration processes."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."
"The user interface is ok and it is very simple to use."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."
"When we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities. Comparison is easy in SSC."
"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities. It's better at it than other products."
"The tool provides comprehensive vulnerability assessments which help ensure our deliverables are as free from vulnerabilities as possible. It has also streamlined our web application vulnerability assessments, assisting us in delivering secure applications to our clients."
 

Cons

"The enhancements are needed in the logging system and log management processes."
"The solution should improve false-positives."
"I would like this solution to be extended to cellular devices or tablets."
"They could include web functionalities such as sandboxing."
"There needs to be better security around API integration."
"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."
"The ease of use could be better."
"The costs are not transparent."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."
"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."
"Fortify WebInspect could improve user-friendliness. Additionally, it is very bulky to use."
"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."
"A localized version, for example, in Korean would be a big improvement to this solution."
"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is extremely affordable and high value for cost."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"The price is okay."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"This solution is very expensive."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"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."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which DevSecOps solutions are best for your needs.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Security Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
Government
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Spectral?
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...
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 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: December 2025.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.