Contrast Security Assess vs Fortify Software Security Center comparison

Contrast Security and OpenText are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Contrast Security is ranked #26 with an average rating of 8.0, while OpenText is ranked #28 with an average rating of 8.0. Contrast Security holds a 0.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to OpenText’s 0.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Contrast Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Contrast Security Assess

Read 11 Contrast Security Assess reviews

1,243 Views
709 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Fortify Software Security C...

Read 7 Fortify Software Security Center reviews

576 Views
513 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Fortify Software Security C...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Fortify Software Security Center and Contrast Security Assess compete in the Application Security Testing category. While Fortify is noted for its strong support and competitive pricing, Contrast Security stands out with advanced features, making it a favored choice for many.

Features: Fortify offers robust static application security testing, code scanning, and reliable performance tailored for traditional environments. Contrast Security provides innovative real-time assessment, continuous monitoring, and adaptability for modern agile environments.

Room for Improvement: Fortify could improve integration with CI/CD pipelines, enhance performance speed, and offer better adaptability. Contrast Security could enhance integration with legacy systems, provide more detailed customization options, and focus on easing transitions for users.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Fortify Software Security Center users experience a smooth deployment process but face delays in customer service responsiveness. Contrast Security Assess allows for quicker deployment and offers more proactive customer support, which increases user satisfaction.

Pricing and ROI: Fortify is recognized for competitive pricing; however, some users feel operational costs impact ROI. Contrast Security Assess has a higher cost, but users find the ROI justified by its cutting-edge features and improved application security performance.

To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. Fortify Software Security Center Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. Fortify Software Security Center

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 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

Contrast Security Assess

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

26th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (27th)

Fortify Software Security C...

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

28th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

5.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortify Software Security Center is 0.4%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

ToddMcAlister

Lead Application and Data Security Engineer at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees

It has an excellent API interface to pull APIs.

Assess has brought our development time down because it helps create code the first time. Instead of going through the Jenkins process to build an application, they can see right off the bat that if there are errors in the code and fix them before it even goes to build.

Read full review

Jonathan Steyn

Principal Technical Consultant at EOH

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

"When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities."

"In our most critical applications, we have a deep dive in the code evaluation, which was something we usually did with periodic vulnerability assessments, code reviews, etc. Now, we have real time access to it. It's something that has greatly enhanced our code's quality. We have actually embedded a KPI in regards to the improvement of our code shell. For example, Contrast provides a baseline where libraries and the usability of the code are evaluated, and they produce a score. We always aim to improve that score. On a quarterly basis, we have added this to our KPIs."

"I am impressed with the product's identification of alerts and vulnerabilities."

"We use the Contrast OSS feature that allows us to look at third-party, open-source software libraries, because it has a cool interface where you can look at all the different libraries. It has some really cool additional features where it gives us how many instances in which something has been used... It tells us it has been used 10 times out of 20 workloads, for example. Then we know for sure that OSS is being used."

"Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs."

"The most valuable feature is the continuous monitoring aspect: the fact that we don't have to wait for scans to complete for the tool to identify vulnerabilities. They're automatically identified through developers' business-as-usual processes."

"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."

"By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"The reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."

"I like the explanation of issues provided by Fortify Software Security Center."

"You can easily download the tool's rule packs and update them."

"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."

"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."

Cons

"Contrast Security Assess covers a wide range of applications like .NET Framework, Java, PSP, Node.js, etc. But there are some like Ubuntu and the .NET Core which are not covered. They have it in their roadmap to have these agents. If they have that, we will have complete coverage."

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"Contrast's ability to support upgrades on the actual agents that get deployed is limited. Our environment is pretty much entirely Java. There are no updates associated with that. You have to actually download a new version of the .jar file and push that out to your servers where your app is hosted. That can be quite cumbersome from a change-management perspective."

"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

"Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side."

"The solution needs to improve flexibility...The scalability of the product is a problem in the solution, especially from a commercial perspective."

"The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities."

"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."

"We are having issues with false positives that need to be resolved."

"The product's overlap feature is restrictive and requires more customization efforts, which can be expensive."

"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."

"This solution is difficult to implement, and it should be made more comfortable for the end-users."

"I am not satisfied with the percentage of false positives, which is around eighteen percent."

"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"The solution is expensive."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

"As a Fortify partner company providing technical support, I find the product expensive in our country, where local, inexpensive products are available."

"This is a costly solution that could be cheaper."

"The solution is priced fair."

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

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

22%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Manufacturing Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Contrast Security Assess?

When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Contrast Security Assess?

Technical support for the solution should be faster. We have to further analyze what kind of CVEs are in the reported libraries and what part of the code is affected. That analysis can be added to ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Contrast Security Assess?

Contrast Security Assess is deployed on-cloud in our organization. I would recommend Contrast Security Assess to other users. It's a really good tool. It provides lots of details on web-based vulne...

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

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Software Security Center?

They use it to scan applications and fix bugs, which are my customers' main use cases for Fortify Software Security Center. As a reseller, I sell this product to provide application security becaus...

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 13% of the time

Seeker vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 11% of the time

Veracode vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 9% of the time

Invicti vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 7% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

OpenText Core Application Security vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 49% of the time

Acunetix vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 38% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 13% of the time

More Fortify Software Security Center Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

August 2025

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

August 2025

Download Fortify Software Security Center product report

Also Known As

Contrast Assess

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

Overview

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Contrast Security

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

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

Neosecure, Acxiom, Skandinavisk Data Center A/S, Parkeon

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. Fortify Software Security Center

July 2025

Free Report: Contrast Security Assess vs. Fortify Software Security Center

Find out what your peers are saying about Contrast Security Assess vs. Fortify Software Security Center and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Contrast Security Assess 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.