CodeSonar vs Fortify Application Defender comparison

CodeSecure and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. CodeSecure is ranked #30, while OpenText is ranked #23 with an average rating of 8.0. CodeSecure holds a 1.3% mindshare in AS, compared to OpenText’s 1.0% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of CodeSecure users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 81% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

CodeSonar

Read 7 CodeSonar reviews

2,559 Views
1,766 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Fortify Application Defender

Read 11 Fortify Application Defender reviews

1,271 Views
1,017 Comparison Views

81% willing to recommend

CodeSonar

Fortify Application Defender

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

```html

Fortify Application Defender and CodeSonar compete in software security assessment. CodeSonar is favored for its robust features despite higher costs, making it the preferred choice for users seeking comprehensive security options.

Features: Fortify Application Defender is recognized for ease of integration, real-time monitoring, and comprehensive support. CodeSonar is noted for advanced static analysis, in-depth error detection, and insights into code vulnerabilities, providing a more extensive feature set.

Room for Improvement: Fortify Application Defender users identify report customization, speed, and sharper reporting tools as areas for enhancement. CodeSonar users seek improved scalability, a more intuitive setup process, and streamlined deployment.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Fortify Application Defender receives praise for its seamless deployment and responsive customer support. CodeSonar users favor more intuitive deployment while appreciating its helpful support services.

Pricing and ROI: Fortify Application Defender offers competitive setup costs and good long-term ROI. CodeSonar requires higher initial investment but offers significant returns due to its comprehensive features, which many users find justify the cost.

```

To learn more, read our detailed CodeSonar vs. Fortify Application Defender Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

CodeSonar vs. Fortify Application Defender

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,259 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

CodeSonar

Ranking in Application Security Tools

30th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Code Analysis (11th)

Fortify Application Defender

Ranking in Application Security Tools

23rd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of CodeSonar is 1.3%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortify Application Defender is 1.0%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Fortify Application Defender	1.0%
CodeSonar	1.3%
Other	97.7%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Mathieu ALBRESPY

Intigration Developer at ez-Wheel

Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand

This is the first time I've used this kind of software. It was the only one we could apply to analyze with MISRA rules. At my new company, I tried to use Klocwork. I tried to use it, just once so I cannot compare it exactly with CodeSonar. I also have a plugin for my Visual Studio and I try to make it work. It's not easy, however, I don't think that we have this kind of functionality with CodeSonar. It can do some incremental analysis. However, since this feature is also available on CodeSonar, it would be a good idea to have a plugin on Visual Studio just to have a quick analysis.

Read full review

VinothSivam

CTO at Abcl

Useful for fast code review in devOps pipelines

I rate the tool's scalability a seven out of ten. However, I'm concerned about how it handles an increasing number of lines of code. As the complexity grows, so does the time it takes for the tool to review everything. I want more clarity on how Fortify Application Defender handles multiple threats. We have numerous endpoints, but the tool runs in our pipeline, meaning it operates in the cloud. All our code is configured there, and the tool runs integration testing, unit testing, user testing, and final production code tests. It's a day-to-day experience. It's utilized almost every day as part of our pipeline runs. Each team responsible for integration testing, human testing, user access testing, and preproduction testing runs it whenever they take a build.

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

"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."

"It has been able to scale."

"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."

"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."

"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."

"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."

"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."

"I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."

"The product saves us cost and time."

"We are able to provide out customers with a secure application after development. They are no longer left wondering if they are vulnerable to different threats within the market following deployment."

"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."

"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."

"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."

"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."

More Fortify Application Defender pros

Cons

"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."

"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."

"It was expensive."

"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."

"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."

"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."

"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."

"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."

"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."

"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."

"The licensing can be a little complex."

"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."

"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."

"The solution could improve the time it takes to scan. When comparing it to SonarQube it does it in minutes while in Fortify Application Defender it can take hours."

"The false positive rate should be lower."

More Fortify Application Defender cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is a bit costly."

"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."

"The solution's price depends on the number of licenses needed and the source code for the project."

"The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools."

"The licensing is very complex, it's project based and can range from $10,000 to $200,000+ depending on the project type and size."

"The base licensing costs for the SaaS platform is about $900 USD per application, per year."

"The price of this solution could be less expensive."

"The product’s price is much higher than other tools."

"Fortify Application Defender is very expensive."

"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten. It comes as an annual cloud subscription. The tool's pricing is around 50 lakhs."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

25%

University

11%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	2

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	8

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Fortify Application Defender?

I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Fortify Application Defender?

The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Fortify Application Defender?

We use the solution for fast code review. It is integrated into our DevOps pipeline.

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs CodeSonar

Compared 36% of the time

Coverity Static vs CodeSonar

Compared 24% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs CodeSonar

Compared 7% of the time

Helix QAC vs CodeSonar

Compared 4% of the time

Jscrambler vs CodeSonar

Compared 2% of the time

More CodeSonar Competitors

Checkmarx One vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 16% of the time

SonarQube vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 10% of the time

Coverity Static vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 10% of the time

Klocwork vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 7% of the time

Tenable.io Web Application Scanning vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 3% of the time

More Fortify Application Defender Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

November 2025

Download CodeSonar product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

November 2025

Download Fortify Application Defender product report

Also Known As

No data available

HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender

Overview

GrammaTech enables organizations to develop software applications more efficiently, on-budget, and on-schedule by helping to eliminate harmful defects that can cause system failures, enable data breaches, and ultimately increase corporate liabilities in today’s connected world. GrammaTech is the developer of CodeSonar, the most powerful source and binary code analysis solution available today. Extraordinarily precise, CodeSonar finds, on average, 2 times more serious defects in software than other static analysis solutions. Designed for organizations with zero tolerance for defects and vulnerabilities in their applications, CodeSonar provides static analysis for applications where reliability and security are paramount - widely used by software developers in avionics, medical, automotive, industrial control, and other mission-critical applications. Some of GrammaTech's customers include Toyota, GE, Hyundai, Kawasaki, LG, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Northrop Grumman, Panasonic, and Samsung.

CodeSecure

Micro Focus Security Fortify Application Defender is a runtime application self-protection (RASP) solution that helps you manage and mitigate risk from homegrown or third-party applications. It provides centralized visibility into application use and abuse while protecting from software vulnerability exploits and other violations in real time.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY

ServiceMaster, Saltworks, SAP

Buyer's Guide

CodeSonar vs. Fortify Application Defender

December 2025

Free Report: CodeSonar vs. Fortify Application Defender

Find out what your peers are saying about CodeSonar vs. Fortify Application Defender and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CodeSonar vs. Fortify Application Defender report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.

We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.