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

Checkmarx SAST vs Fortify Software Security Center comparison

Checkmarx and OpenText are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Checkmarx is ranked #22 with an average rating of 9.0, while OpenText is ranked #30 with an average rating of 8.0. Checkmarx holds a 1.0% mindshare in SAST, compared to OpenText’s 0.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of OpenText users who would recommend it.
Checkmarx SAST
Read 2 Checkmarx SAST reviews
  • 563 Views
  • 98 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
Fortify Software Security C...
Read 6 Fortify Software Security Center reviews
  • 467 Views
  • 46 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive Summary
We performed a comparison between Checkmarx SAST and Fortify Software Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx SAST vs. Fortify Software Security Center Report (Updated: June 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Checkmarx SAST vs. Fortify Software Security Center
June 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 859,129 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

Checkmarx SAST
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
22nd
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Fortify Software Security C...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
30th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.3
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx SAST is 1.0%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortify Software Security Center is 0.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Cuneyt KALPAKOGLU Phd. - PeerSpot reviewer
Identifying code vulnerabilities swiftly with no need to complete the coding and offers good security
The primary use case of Checkmarx SAST is application security, specifically static application security testing. It is essential and the root of this concept I did not find measurable information about the financial benefits or return on investment. The most important competitive advantage and…
Read full review
Jonathan Steyn - PeerSpot reviewer
Comprehensive vulnerability analysis and customization features with decent pricing
Software Security Center is highly customizable and helps me test all vulnerability data against the latest conventions like OWASP Top Ten, CVE Top twenty-five, and several other legal compliances. WebInspect supports a number of APIs and web endpoints. I find its feature of macro recording allows for testing vulnerabilities during multi-factor authentication sessions very valuable. I appreciate the ability to further analyze data with tools like Audit Workbench.
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

"The most important feature is that Checkmarx protects our company against attacks."
"The most important feature is that Checkmarx protects our company against attacks."
"The most important competitive advantage and benefit is the ability to identify vulnerabilities in the source code immediately without needing to complete the coding."
"The reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."
"You can easily download the tool's rule packs and update them."
"I like the explanation of issues provided by Fortify Software Security Center."
"Software Security Center is highly customizable and helps me test all vulnerability data against the latest conventions like OWASP Top Ten, CVE Top twenty-five, and several other legal compliances."
"Fortify Analytics' AI function helps scan and provides more detailed explanations and recommendations about vulnerabilities."
"The overall rating for this tool is ten out of ten."
"This is a stable solution at the end of the day."
 

Cons

"We had some issues where Checkmarx did not recognize a vulnerability."
"We had some issues where Checkmarx did not recognize a vulnerability. We had to talk with the vendor, and they had to include an improvement in the tool to resolve this issue."
"The on-premises version is more expensive compared to the cloud version."
"We are having issues with false positives that need to be resolved."
"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."
"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."
"I am not satisfied with the percentage of false positives, which is around eighteen percent."
"The product's overlap feature is restrictive and requires more customization efforts, which can be expensive."
"This solution is difficult to implement, and it should be made more comfortable for the end-users."
"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution is priced fair."
"This is a costly solution that could be cheaper."
"As a Fortify partner company providing technical support, I find the product expensive in our country, where local, inexpensive products are available."
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Checkmarx SAST?
We were users in a small country, and we paid one consolidated bill for all the tools, so I don't know the specific amount for Checkmarx.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Checkmarx SAST?
We had some issues where Checkmarx did not recognize a vulnerability. We had to talk with the vendor, and they had to include an improvement in the tool to resolve this issue.
See all answers
What is your primary use case for Checkmarx SAST?
We integrated Checkmarx with our pipelines in Jenkins. We had it fully automated for static security scanning to protect our company against attacks.
See all answers
What do you like most about Micro Focus Software Security Center?
You can easily download the tool's rule packs and update them.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Software Security Center?
In the beginning, it was difficult for me to verify that our usage of Fortify Software Security Center corresponded to the license and criteria. Now, we have negotiated a number of details to respe...
See all answers
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Software Security Center?
I would like the false positive issue to diminish. I have experienced a lot of false positives, but I think this is due to using an older version. I hope the new version will resolve my problem.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

Checkmarx One vs Checkmarx SAST Logo
Checkmarx One vs Checkmarx SAST
Compared 76% of the time
Semgrep vs Checkmarx SAST Logo
Semgrep vs Checkmarx SAST
Compared 6% of the time
Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Checkmarx SAST Logo
Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Checkmarx SAST
Compared 5% of the time
GitLab vs Checkmarx SAST Logo
GitLab vs Checkmarx SAST
Compared 5% of the time
GitHub Code Scanning vs Checkmarx SAST Logo
GitHub Code Scanning vs Checkmarx SAST
Compared 4% of the time
More Checkmarx SAST Competitors
OpenText Core Application Security vs Fortify Software Security Center Logo
OpenText Core Application Security vs Fortify Software Security Center
Compared 47% of the time
Acunetix vs Fortify Software Security Center Logo
Acunetix vs Fortify Software Security Center
Compared 41% of the time
HCL AppScan vs Fortify Software Security Center Logo
HCL AppScan vs Fortify Software Security Center
Compared 11% of the time
More Fortify Software Security Center Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
June 2025
Checkmarx SAST reportDownload Checkmarx SAST product report
Buyer's Guide
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
June 2025
Fortify Software Security Center reportDownload Fortify Software Security Center product report
 

Also Known As

SAST
Micro Focus Software Security Center, Application Security Center, HPE Application Security Center, WebInspect
 

Overview

Checkmarx SAST provides advanced static application security testing by identifying vulnerabilities in source code. It's ideal for ISOs, security professionals, and developers striving to secure applications during development.

Checkmarx SAST is known for its powerful code scanning capabilities that integrate seamlessly into existing development environments. It supports a wide range of programming languages, which makes it applicable for diverse development projects. Some users suggest improvements in the scan performance speed and enhanced support in handling false positives to further optimize workflow efficiency.

What are the standout features of Checkmarx SAST?
  • Language Support: Offers broad language support catering to multiple coding frameworks.
  • Integration Flexibility: Seamlessly integrates with existing CI/CD pipelines and developer tools.
  • Comprehensive Scanning: Detects security vulnerabilities early in the development process.
  • Detailed Reporting: Provides comprehensive reports that help prioritize remediation efforts.
What benefits and ROI should users consider?
  • Improved Security Posture: Enhances application security by catching vulnerabilities early.
  • Cost Efficiency: Reduces costs associated with post-deployment issue resolution.
  • Developer Empowerment: Allows developers to identify and fix issues independently.
  • Regulatory Compliance: Assists in meeting compliance requirements efficiently.

Implemented across various industries, Checkmarx SAST supports sectors like finance, healthcare, and technology with their stringent security requirements. By integrating seamlessly into existing workflows, it ensures that applications remain secure while not disrupting industry-specific processes.

Checkmarx
Software Security Center enables management, development, and security teams to work together to triage, track, validate, automate, and manage software security activities.
OpenText
 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Neosecure, Acxiom, Skandinavisk Data Center A/S, Parkeon
Buyer's Guide
Checkmarx SAST vs. Fortify Software Security Center
June 2025
Free Report: Checkmarx SAST vs. Fortify Software Security Center
Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx SAST vs. Fortify Software Security Center and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Checkmarx SAST vs. Fortify Software Security Center report.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.