Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Fortify Application Defender vs Spirent CyberFlood comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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
28th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Spirent CyberFlood
Ranking in Application Security Tools
45th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (31st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Fortify Application Defender is 0.7%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Spirent CyberFlood is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Saroj-Patnaik - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable solution with excellent machine learning algorithms but expensive and lacking support
I primarily use Fortify Application Defender to assess whether our products can defend against applications Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications. Fortify Application Defender gives…
Jos Badimo - PeerSpot reviewer
Test assurance improves compliance and products with good performance
The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation. The most significant issue I encounter with the solution is the user interface. It would be beneficial if I could remain on one screen most of the time. Even if the system navigates me to another screen, it should effectively return me to the main screen.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."
"I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy."
"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 product saves us cost and time."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"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 most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."
"CyberFlood is flexible."
"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."
"The testing compliance feature is particularly impressive."
"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."
"The testing compliance feature is particularly impressive."
 

Cons

"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."
"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."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"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."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"The false positive rate should be lower."
"Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing."
"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."
"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."
"The initial setup is not straightforward and can be quite challenging."
"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."
"The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Fortify Application Defender is very expensive."
"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 licensing is very complex, it's project based and can range from $10,000 to $200,000+ depending on the project type and size."
"CyberFlood is reasonably priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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.
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...
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.
What needs improvement with Spirent CyberFlood?
The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation. The most significant issue I encounter with the solution is the user interface. It would be beneficial if I could remain on one...
What is your primary use case for Spirent CyberFlood?
I have been using the solution for a year now. The customers I work with are focused on both custom test assurance and test automation. The solution is utilized in the financial services sector and...
What advice do you have for others considering Spirent CyberFlood?
The language barrier and time difference pose significant issues with customer support. The price is competitive. The biggest benefits I find are test assurance, the reliability of the test results...
 

Also Known As

HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender
CyberFlood Virtual, Spirent Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing, Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ServiceMaster, Saltworks, SAP
Digicel
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify Application Defender vs. Spirent CyberFlood and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.