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

CloudBees vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 14, 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

CloudBees
Ranking in DevSecOps
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Build Automation (6th), Configuration Management (11th), Value Stream Management Software (2nd), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (2nd), Feature Management (1st), AI Software Development (4th)
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 January 2026, in the DevSecOps category, the mindshare of CloudBees is 2.7%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 6.3%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
DevSecOps Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
CloudBees2.7%
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing6.3%
Other91.0%
DevSecOps
 

Featured Reviews

YashBrahmani - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Associate at BNP Paribas CIB
Offers a clear visualization and overview of workflows and helpful in managing CI/CD processes
Improvement in the sense that they can do better in terms of management of logs and stuff like that because the console logs are very extensive, and that causes a lot of storage issues. That is one of the things which is there. Also, with respect to the traditional platform and the modern platform, many things have upgraded, and it has quite improved. But when we talk about the performance of the agents, it’s still very crucial because it’s not up to par. It takes a lot of time to provision the agent and to finish the build because of the SSH connection and the JNLP connection. Due to that, sometimes the agent doesn’t get provisioned. Those are some of the blockers that meet up the time in terms of administering the instance.
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

"I find the automation feature most valuable. CloudBees is highly scalable and supports both small and large teams. The deployment process is also faster when compared to on-premise."
"The customer support is good. You get good representatives from CloudBees to help you and understand your requirements."
"CloudBees assists by automating tasks, previously done manually, in the pipeline setup."
"The security audit product offered by CloudBees is particularly beneficial in automating audit processes, which reduces the time developers spend on audits."
"It can manage multiple Jenkins instances."
"The most valuable features are Java features, microservice communication, payment validation, Jenkins Sonar, management master to CloudBees, Blue Ocean, JobConfig, and support."
"CloudBees's user interface is very simple and user-friendly."
"CloudBees updates its features frequently, so if we need something like SSL login, they enable it."
"It is easy to use, and its reporting is fairly simple."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"The transaction recorder within WebInspect is easy to use, which is valuable for our team."
"The user interface is ok and it is very simple to use."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."
"Reporting, centralized dashboard, and bird's eye view of all vulnerabilities are the most valuable features."
 

Cons

"The setup is somewhat complicated. You need a cloud architect and engineer to set it up properly. The initial setup will take time, so you need a good engineer and architect to handle it."
"The platform could integrate better with other tools and support external tools directly."
"A lot of stability issues are there with CloudBees."
"The user interface of CloudBees is good but could be even more intuitive. Improving the user-friendliness of the interface and having simpler setup configurations would greatly benefit new users."
"I noticed that CloudBees runs too slowly because some applications run more than 50 pipelines."
"It could improve the document upload process."
"The problem with CloudBees is that when you merge it, the pipelines would randomly fail multiple times."
"I would like to see improved speed and availability."
"Fortify WebInspect could improve user-friendliness. Additionally, it is very bulky to use."
"Fortify WebInspect's shortcoming stems from the fact that it is a very expensive product in Korea, which makes it difficult for its potential customers to introduce the product in their IT environment."
"One thing I would like to see them introduce is a cloud-based platform."
"Not sufficiently compatible with some of our systems."
"The scanner could be better."
"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."
"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."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The price is okay."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which DevSecOps solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Legal Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise17
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with CloudBees?
There are connection issues with CloudBees, specifically between Sybase and CloudBees. We often encounter connection problems, and there are issues with the pipelines.
What is your primary use case for CloudBees?
We use CloudBees for deploying the code in higher environments, such as QA, C2, staging, and production.
What advice do you have for others considering CloudBees?
I would recommend CloudBees to others because building jobs is much easier than with other solutions.
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

No data available
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Capital One, PEGA, vistaprint, HSBC, BOSCH, Starbucks Coffee
Aaron's
Find out what your peers are saying about CloudBees vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.