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

Fortify Application Defender vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

Fortify Application Defender
Ranking in Application Security Tools
33rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Fortify Application Defender is 1.5%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.3%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security3.3%
Fortify Application Defender1.5%
Other95.2%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

VS
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.
Himanshu_Tyagi - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
Supports secure development pipelines and improves issue detection but limits internal visibility and needs broader dashboard integration
If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. That was the only reason we migrated from Fortify on Demand to another solution. Fortify has another tool which is Fortify WebInspect. On Demand is the outsourcing solution, and WebInspect you can use with your in-house team, which is basically the product developed by the Fortify team. For automated scanning, Fortify helps a lot. Regarding the visibility for the internal team, everyone is moving toward the DevSecOps side, and Fortify team has made good progress that you can integrate into your CICD pipeline. One thing I would highlight is if Fortify can focus more on the centralized dashboard of the tools because nowadays, tools such as SentinelOne also exist for identifying security issues, but they have a centralized dashboard that merges their cloud solution and application security side solution together. If you have one tool that works for different solutions, it helps a lot. They are doing good, but they should invest more on the AI side as well because AI security is evolving these days. On the cloud side, they have already made good progress, but I believe they should explore the new area related to AI security as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"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."
"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"The tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."
"This is a great tool and the kind of support it provides is very helpful."
"When choosing a software security product, we expect the product not only has the ability to find exploits, but also has educational and instructional capabilities related to exploits."
"We use Micro Focus Fortify on Demand to access web applications and more."
"If somebody wants to shift left or integrate security early on in the CI/CD pipeline from a DevOps standpoint, this is probably one of the best tools available."
"I use the solution in my company for security code scans."
"It is valuable in improving our overall security posture by catching significant errors."
"Fortify is effective in identifying such oversights, making it a really helpful tool despite its problems."
"The user interface is good."
"HP Fortify is perfect for any company that creates their own applications or uses vendor-developed ones; it’s great for QA and development phases."
 

Cons

"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."
"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"The false positive rate should be lower."
"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 security checks. Many independent and open-source tools are available, from Apache to various libraries. Using multiple DevOps pipeline tools can slow the turnaround time."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The thing that could be improved is reducing the cost of usage and including some of the most pricey features, such as dynamic analysis and that sort of functionality, which makes the difference between different types of tools."
"I find that while it does find a lot of legitimate threats, it tends to have a lot of false positives, and there are more false positives than I would like to see."
"Primarily for a complex, advanced website, they don't really understand some of the functionalities. So for instance, they could tell us that there is a vulnerability because somebody could possibly do something, but they don't really understand the code to realize that we actually negate that vulnerability through some other mechanism in the program. In addition, the technical support is just not there. We have open tickets. They don't respond. Even if they respond, we're not seeing eye to eye. As the company got sold and bought, the support got worse."
"There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify. One day it may pass a scan with no issues, and the next day, without any code changes, it will report vulnerabilities such as password exposure."
"I would like the solution to add AI support."
"Reporting could be improved. It would nice to export to an Excel sheet or another spreadsheet."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the user interface by making it more user-friendly."
"Technical support is 6/10. I find the Internet to be more helpful at times than their own tech support in finding answers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product’s price is much higher than other tools."
"Fortify Application Defender is very expensive."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive."
"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."
"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."
"The subscription model, on a per-scan basis, is a bit expensive. That's another reason we are not using it for all the apps."
"The pricing can be improved because it is complex when compared to the competition."
"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."
"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."
"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."
"Buying a license would be feasible for regular use. For intermittent use, the cloud-based option can be used (Fortify on Demand)."
"The pricing model it's based on how many applications you wish to scan."
"There are different costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand depending on the assessments you want to use. There is only a standard license needed to use the solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
Areas for improvement should be contextualized post the OpenText acquisition, but back when I was working with Micro Focus, they focused heavily on enterprise-centric solutions. Now, after the acqu...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
For OpenText Core Application Security, I currently support a couple of my clients who are using Fortify on Demand for their web application, CRM, and sales platform. Many good features of Fortify ...
What advice do you have for others considering Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
I use Fortify on Demand for monitoring up to a certain extent; it provides monitoring and helps analyze and identify issues that could propagate in the application. When used in conjunction with Ar...
 

Also Known As

HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ServiceMaster, Saltworks, SAP
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify Application Defender vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.