No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Digital.ai Application Security vs HCL AppScan comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Digital.ai Application Secu...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
35th
Average Rating
6.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
HCL AppScan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
19th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (16th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Application Security is 1.0%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HCL AppScan is 2.4%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
HCL AppScan2.4%
Digital.ai Application Security1.0%
Other96.6%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Arne Dormaels - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Developer at Ghent University
Helps to improve knowledge on software security
I used the tool to prepare for the interview as a Business Developer. It helped me improve my understanding on software security.  I would like the tool to integrate AI and automation that is dedicated to detecting software vulnerabilities.  I have used the tool for two weeks.  I would rate the…
Ravi Khanchandani - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder Director at Techsa Services
Has improved identification of encryption and authentication issues across cloud and on-prem applications
During the learning curve of onboarding HCL AppScan, we learned that HCL has altered the portfolio and now offers HCL AppScan 360, which has a much better look and feel with an improved user interface. However, there is one feature called SCA, which stands for Software Composition Analysis, that could be improved. When I'm doing an application scan, HCL AppScan has the ability to generate information about what components are in use. For example, if I'm scanning a web application, it shows me the various components being used. It tells me whether I have Java libraries, .NET frameworks, or other log management libraries such as Log4j, and what versions of those specific components are present. I would like to see more detailed reports from the tool. Currently, you can find out the components belonging to a specific software, but if detailed reporting became available, you would be in a better position to identify vulnerabilities. For instance, I could identify that I had the Log4j vulnerability and know that I need to fix my application accordingly. If they add the features I'm describing, I would consider giving them a higher rating. However, I've only been experienced with the product for three months.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I used the tool to prepare for the interview as a Business Developer. It helped me improve my understanding on software security."
"IBM AppScan has made our work easy, as we can do four to five scans of websites at a time, which saves time when it comes to vulnerability."
"The solution is easy to install. I would rate the product's setup between six to seven out of ten. The deployment time depends on the applications that need to be scanned. We have a development and operations team to take care of the product's maintenance."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Usually when we deploy the application, there is a process for ethical hacking. The main benefit is that, the ethical hacking is almost clean, every time. So it's less cost, less effort, less time to production."
"AppScan's most valuable features include its ability to identify vulnerabilities accurately, provide detailed remediation steps, and the newly introduced AI-powered features that enhance its functionality further."
"The solution is cheap."
"Compared to other tools only AppScan supports special language."
"The reporting part is the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"I would like the tool to integrate AI and automation that is dedicated to detecting software vulnerabilities."
"The databases for HCL are small and have room for improvement."
"Improving usability could enhance the overall experience with AppScan. It would be beneficial to make the solution more user-friendly, ensuring that everyone can easily navigate and utilize its features."
"They should have a better UI for dashboards."
"The solution's scalability can be a matter of concern because one license runs on one machine only."
"The tool should improve its output. Scanning is not a challenge anymore since there are many such tools available in the market. The product needs to focus on how its output is being used by end users. It should be also more user-friendly. One of the major challenges is in the tool's integration with applications that need to be scanned. Sometimes, the scanning is not proper."
"Visibility is an issue for us. Our partners do not know we have integrations with some of IBM products."
"We would like to see a check in the specific vulnerabilities in mobile applications or rooted devices, such as jailbreaking devices."
"We have experienced challenges when trying to integrate this solution with other products; when you compare it with the other SecOps products, the quality of the output is too low and it is very outdated."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I rate the product's price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high. HCL AppScan is an expensive tool."
"HCL AppScan is expensive."
"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."
"The price is very expensive."
"I would rate the product's pricing a nine out of ten. The product's pricing is expensive compared to the features that they offer."
"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."
"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."
"The product is moderately priced, though it's an investment due to extensive code analysis needs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Construction Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
13%
University
8%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about HCL AppScan?
The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase.
What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?
During the learning curve of onboarding HCL AppScan, we learned that HCL has altered the portfolio and now offers HCL AppScan 360, which has a much better look and feel with an improved user interf...
What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?
I'm currently working with BigFix and HCL AppScan. At least three people in my company are using HCL AppScan. Since we are a reseller, we run it in both lab environments and live production applica...
 

Also Known As

Arxan Application Protection, Digital.ai Application Protection
IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Valencell
Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: May 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.