Fortify Application Defender vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Fortify Application Defender and OpenText Core Application Security are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Fortify Application Defender is ranked #33, while OpenText Core Application Security is ranked #8 with an average rating of 7.8. Fortify Application Defender holds a 1.7% mindshare in AS, compared to OpenText Core Application Security’s 3.5% mindshare. Additionally, 81% of Fortify Application Defender users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 90% of OpenText Core Application Security users who would recommend it.

Fortify Application Defender

Read 11 Fortify Application Defender reviews

4,140 Views
3,560 Comparison Views

81% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Application S...

Read 64 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

13,745 Views
10,309 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

Fortify Application Defender

OpenText Core Application S...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

Fortify Application Defender and OpenText Core Application Security compete in the application security sector. Fortify appears to have an advantage with a unified view for multiple scanning types, beneficial for complex environments.

Features: Fortify Application Defender features comprehensive static and dynamic code analysis, seamless tool integration for scanning, and automatic vulnerability detection. OpenText Core Application Security excels in early vulnerability identification in development, offers tailored security measures, and supports software composition analysis.

Room for Improvement: Fortify struggles with high false positive rates, integration issues with newer technologies, and complex deployment. OpenText faces slow scan processes, limited language support, and the need for better AI and integration features.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText offers diverse deployment options across on-premises, public, and hybrid clouds, while Fortify provides on-premises and cloud solutions. OpenText has varied technical support experiences, whereas Fortify offers high-quality support but with communication efficiency gaps.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText is considered expensive but justifies costs through security efficacy, offering a favorable ROI. Fortify’s complex and costly licensing is valued for high security returns, with costs varying based on application volume and usage.

To learn more, read our detailed Fortify Application Defender vs. OpenText Core Application Security Report (Updated: November 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Fortify Application Defender vs. OpenText Core Application Security

November 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,769 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

Fortify Application Defender

Ranking in Application Security Tools

33rd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Core Application S...

Ranking in Application Security Tools

8th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Fortify Application Defender is 1.7%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.5%, down from 3.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security	3.5%
Fortify Application Defender	1.7%
Other	94.8%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

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

Himanshu_Tyagi

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.

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

"It is one of those things that once you see it in action, it is pretty impressive."

"This is a great tool and the kind of support it provides is very helpful."

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

"Fortify Application Defender has a few drawbacks, it has its own pros and cons, but it's a good tool to use in any industry."

"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 tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."

"The information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."

More Fortify Application Defender pros

"What stands out to me is the user-friendliness of each feature."

"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."

"Its ability to perform different types of scans, keep everything in one place, and track the triage process in Fortify SSC stands out."

"The features I found most valuable is that it is very configurable and the installation was also very easy."

"The vulnerability detection and scanning are awesome features."

"I think the most valuable feature is its ability to address the source code scanning and dynamic scanning in a known, correlated way."

"OpenText Core Application Security helps maintain compliance standards with a faster remediation cycle, as we know the vulnerabilities, and everybody knows that the developers can perform fixes more quickly."

"Fortify on Demand's best feature is that there's no need to install and configure it locally since it's on the cloud."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

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

"The false positive rate should be lower."

"The solution is quite expensive."

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

"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."

"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."

More Fortify Application Defender cons

"The solution has some issues with latency. Sometimes it takes a while to respond. This issue should be addressed."

"It lacks of some important features that the competitors have, such as Software Composition Analysis, full dead code detection, and Agile Alliance's Best Practices and Technical Debt."

"It is kind of taking a bunch of different scanners, and SSC is just kind of managing the results."

"It's still a little bit too complex for regular developers."

"I would like the solution to add AI support."

"I know OpenText is developing Aviator, similar to ChatGPT, with LLM inside the OpenText Core Application Security environment. However, I understand they do not have it for the on-premises environment."

"It needs to support more languages."

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand cannot be run from a Linux Agent. When we are coding the endpoint it will not work, we have to use Windows Agent. This is something they could improve."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"Fortify Application Defender is very expensive."

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

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

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

"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."

"Buying a license would be feasible for regular use. For intermittent use, the cloud-based option can be used (Fortify on Demand)."

"The product's cost depends on the type of license."

"Despite being on the higher end in terms of cost, the biggest value lies in its abilities, including robust features, seamless integration, and high-quality findings."

"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."

"The pricing can be improved because it is complex when compared to the competition."

"We are still using the trial version at this point but I can already see from the trial version alone that it is a good product. For others, I would say that Fortify on Demand might look expensive at the beginning, but it is very powerful and so you shouldn't be put off by the price."

"The solution is a little expensive."

"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."

More OpenText Core Application Security pricing and cost advice

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

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Construction Company

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

12%

Outsourcing Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	18
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	46

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...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 16% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 11% of the time

Veracode vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 8% of the time

Klocwork vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 5% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 3% of the time

More Fortify Application Defender Competitors

SonarQube vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 29% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 5% of the time

GitHub vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

HCL AppScan vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

October 2026

Download Fortify Application Defender product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Application Security

October 2026

OpenText Core Application Security report

Download OpenText Core Application Security product report

Also Known As

HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand

Overview

Fortify Application Defender offers strong protection by identifying and resolving security defects using machine learning and real-time remediation. Its user-friendly interface simplifies integration in CI/CD workflows and supports security scanning across operating systems and compilers.

Fortify Application Defender is a comprehensive tool for static code analysis and security scanning. It integrates machine learning algorithms to identify vulnerabilities quickly and offers real-time remediation solutions. Its seamless integration with WebInspect allows for tailored rule sets that significantly improve defense against application-specific threats. The tool's efficiency in static and software composition analysis provides actionable repair insights. As part of a DevOps pipeline, it aids in maintaining code quality, helping organizations protect sensitive information within their applications. Additionally, it supports multiple operating systems and environments, allowing users to scan for vulnerabilities in both code and libraries effectively.

What are the key features of Fortify Application Defender?

Security Defect Identification: Uses advanced algorithms to detect security flaws.
Real-time Remediation: Provides immediate solutions for vulnerabilities.
WebInspect Integration: Customizable rule sets enhance protection.
Actionable Insights: Delivers clear repair strategies.
User-friendly Configuration: Easy set-up in CI/CD pipelines.

What benefits should users consider when evaluating Fortify Application Defender?

Scalable Integration: Works with multiple operating systems and compilers.
Improved Code Quality: Prevents exposure of sensitive data.
Efficient Scanning: Reduces time to identify threats.
Customizable Rules: Enhances security measures specific to applications.

Fortify Application Defender is commonly used in industries like banking and finance to secure applications by inspecting source code for vulnerabilities. Companies can integrate it seamlessly into their DevOps pipelines, ensuring that their applications are protected against cyberattacks while maintaining high code quality. They can thereby avoid common risks such as IP and password exposure by leveraging static code analysis and other integrated technologies available within this tool.

OpenText

OpenText Core Application Security offers robust features like static and dynamic scanning, real-time vulnerability tracking, and seamless integration with development platforms, designed to enhance code security and reduce operational costs.

OpenText Core Application Security is a cloud-based, on-demand service providing accurate and deep scanning capabilities with detailed reporting. Its integrations with development platforms ensure an enhanced security layer in the development lifecycle, benefiting users by lowering operational costs and facilitating efficient remediation. The platform addresses needs for intuitive interfaces, API support, and comprehensive vulnerability assessments, helping improve code security and accelerate time-to-market. Despite its strengths, challenges exist around false positives, report clarity, and language support, alongside confusing pricing and package options. Enhancements are sought in areas like CI/CD pipeline configuration, report visualization, scan times, and integration with third-party tools such as GitLab, container scanning, and software composition analysis.

What features define OpenText Core Application Security?

Static and Dynamic Scanning: Offers thorough analysis to identify vulnerabilities during development.
Real-time Vulnerability Tracking: Continuously updates and monitors potential security threats.
Seamless Development Platform Integration: Enhances security processes without disrupting workflows.
Cloud-Based Service: Provides flexible, on-demand security capabilities with accurate results.
API Support: Allows smooth integration and automation within existing systems.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Reduced Operational Costs: Optimizes resources by lowering costs associated with security management.
Efficient Remediation: Speeds up the process of identifying and resolving vulnerabilities.
Enhanced Code Security: Strengthens overall application security during the development lifecycle.
Accelerated Time-to-Market: Streamlines development stages by integrating essential security tools.

Industries like mobile applications, e-commerce, and banking leverage OpenText Core Application Security for its ability to identify vulnerabilities such as SQL injections. Integrating seamlessly with DevSecOps and security auditing processes, this tool supports developers in writing safer code, ensuring secure application deployment and enhancing software assurance.

OpenText

Sample Customers

ServiceMaster, Saltworks, SAP

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.

Buyer's Guide

Fortify Application Defender vs. OpenText Core Application Security

November 2026

Free Report: Fortify Application Defender vs. OpenText Core Application Security

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify Application Defender vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Fortify Application Defender vs. OpenText Core Application Security 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.