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

Invicti vs OpenText Core Application Security vs Veracode 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Invicti is 1.5%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.7%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 7.1%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Veracode7.1%
OpenText Core Application Security3.7%
Invicti1.5%
Other87.7%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Kunal M - PeerSpot reviewer
Proactive scanning measures and realistic audit recommendations enhance development focus
Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment. This feature helps us focus on priorities and prioritize the development team's effort, integrating seamlessly with DevOps to facilitate proactive scans of environments. Invicti also provides audit recommendations that are quite realistic, making it easy to discuss plans with developers.
Jonathan Steyn - PeerSpot reviewer
Source code analyzer, FPR file generation, reduction of false positives and generates compliance reports, for in-depth analysis
Not challenges with the product itself. The product is very reliable. It does have a steep learning curve. But, again, one thing that Fortify or OpenText does very well is training. There are a lot of free resources and training in the community forums, free training as well as commercial training where users can train on how to use the back-end systems and the scanning engines and how to use command-line arguments because some of the procedures or some of the tools do require a bit of a learning curve. That's the only challenge I've really seen for customers because you have to learn how to use the tool effectively. But Fortify has, in fact, improved its user interface and the way users engage the dashboards and the interfaces. It is intuitive. It's easy to understand. But in some regards, the cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions. But from the point of the reliability index and how powerful the tool is, there's no challenge there. But it's just from a learning perspective; users might need a bit more skill to use the tool. The user interface isn't that tedious. It's not that difficult to understand. When I initially learned how to use the interfaces, I was able to master it within a week and was able to use it quite effectively. So training is required. All skills are needed to learn how to use the tool. I would like to see more enhancements in the dashboards. Dashboards are available. They do need some configuration and settings. But I would like to see more business intelligence capabilities within the tool. It's not particularly a cybersecurity function, but, for instance, business impact analysis or other features where you can actually use business intelligence capabilities within your security tool. That would be remarkable because not only do you have a cybersecurity tool, but you also have a tool that can give you business impact analysis and some other measurements. A bit more intelligence in terms of that from a cybersecurity perspective would be remarkable.
Kv Rao - PeerSpot reviewer
Integrates pipelines smoothly and fortifies code against vulnerabilities
I use Veracode in multiple places including static code analysis, penetration testing, and dynamic code analysis. It is part of our pipeline and integrates well with Bitbucket and Git pipelines The ease of integration with Bitbucket pipelines and Git pipelines is vital for us. Veracode allows us…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."
"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."
"I am impressed by the whole technology that they are using in this solution. It is really fast. When using netscan, the confirmation that it gives on the vulnerabilities is pretty cool. It is really easy to configure a scan in Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner. It is also really easy to deploy."
"Scan, proxify the application, and then detailed report along with evidence and remediations to problems."
"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."
"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."
"Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios."
"Netsparker provides a more interactive interface that is more appealing."
"The most valuable features are the detailed reporting and the ability to set up deep scanning of the software, both of which are in the same place."
"There is not only one specific feature that we find valuable. The idea is to integrate the solution in DevSecOps which we were able to do."
"The solution scans our code and provides us with a dashboard of all the vulnerabilities and the criticality of the vulnerabilities. It is very useful that they provide right then and there all the information about the vulnerability, including possible fixes, as well as some additional documentation and links to the authoritative sources of why this is an issue and what's the correct way to deal with it."
"The installation was easy."
"It has saved us a lot of time as we focus primarily on programming rather than tool operational work."
"Each bank may have its own core banking applications with proprietary support for different programming languages. This makes Fortify particularly relevant and advantageous in those cases."
"This product is top-notch solution and the technology is the best on the market."
"Provides good depth of scanning and we get good results."
"The deployment mode is very useful."
"In terms of secure development, the SAST scan is very useful because we are able to identify security flaws in the code base itself, for the application."
"What I found most valuable in Veracode Static Analysis is that it categorizes security vulnerabilities."
"Veracode's technical support is great. They assigned us a TAM and once a week, we have a brief engagement with the TAM to verify that everything's going well. If we have any outstanding issues, they get serviced and addressed."
"The SCA, agent-based analysis, is valuable. SAST and DAST take time, while this is quite fast. It gives the results very quickly. We have implemented it into our CI/CD pipeline."
"The static scan is the most valuable feature."
"One of the best things they offer is the scalability. The fact that you can work with it through the cloud means that if you have unintegrated business units, you don't have to worry about having a solution on-prem and having the network connection; you don't have to worry about giving up source code, you are just sending your binary files for most of the applications. So it scales much faster."
"The most important feature is the static scanning analysis, and the reason is that it can tell us vulnerability in that code, right before we go ahead and push something to production or provide something to a client... Dynamic scanning actually hits our Web applications, to try to detect any well known Web application vulnerabilities as well."
 

Cons

"Maybe the ability to make a good reporting format is needed."
"Invicti's reporting capabilities need enhancement. We need enterprise-level information instead of repo-level details. Unlike Appiro, Invicti does not provide portfolio-level insights into vulnerability remediation over time."
"It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities."
"Invicti's reporting capabilities need enhancement."
"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."
"Currently, there is nothing I would like to improve."
"They could enhance the support for data swap testing for the platform."
"Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing."
"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."
"The reporting capabilities need improvement, as there are some features that we would like to have but are not available at the moment."
"There were some regulated compliances, which were not there."
"The products must provide better integration with build tools."
"Fortify on Demand needs to improve its pricing."
"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."
"The product has a lot of false positives."
"With Rapid7 I utilized its reporting capabilities to deliver Client Reports within just a few minutes of checking the data. I believe that HP’s FoD Clients could sell more services to clients if HP put more effort into delivering visually pleasing reporting capabilities."
"The on-platform reporting needs to be opened up much more. We'd like to be able to look at the inspection data from a trending perspective in a much more open manner. I need to be able to sort and filter much more flexibly than I can today."
"It would be ideal if it was able to demonstrate higher levels of cybersecurity certifications like becoming FedRAMP compliant or working in those areas."
"It does nearly everything, but penetration testing."
"There might be room for improvement in the in-app guidance and the tips and tricks for the developer about how to progress. We would like more insight into the development environment, where they would get guidance on how to avoid flaws."
"They cover a lot of languages already and it doesn't make sense for them to cover legacy languages but I know there is a need for covering legacy languages."
"There is also a size limit of 100 MB so we cannot upload files that are larger than that. That could be improved. Also, the duration of the scan is a bit too long."
"The technical support service has room for improvement."
"Veracode's false positives have room for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."
"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."
"Invicti is best suited for large enterprises. I don't think small and medium-sized businesses can afford it. Maintenance costs aren't that great."
"Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license."
"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."
"The price should be 20% lower"
"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."
"It is competitive in the security market."
"If I exceed one million lines of code, there might be an extra cost or a change in the pricing bracket."
"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."
"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."
"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"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."
"I'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."
"The product's cost depends on the type of license."
"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."
"The worst part about the product is that it does not scale at all. Also, microservices apps will cost you a fortune."
"Without getting too specific, I'd say the average yearly cost is around $50,000. The costs include licensing and maintenance support."
"I don't really get too involved in the cost sides of things that's in my job, I'm more of a technical focus, but I have heard from my manager and a couple other people that the solution is quite expensive."
"The pricing is reasonable compared to other tools."
"Pricing seems fair for what is offered, and licensing has been no problem. All developers are able to get the access they need."
"Veracode's price is high. I would like them to better optimize their pricing."
"No issues, the pricing seems reasonable."
"I'm unfamiliar with the solution's pricing, but it must be worth the cost from a company perspective, as we have been using it for years and have no plans to move away from it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise43
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise43
Large Enterprise112
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?
As a technical user, I do not handle pricing or licensing, but I am aware that Invicti offers flexible licensing mode...
What do you like most about Invicti?
The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan.
What needs improvement with Invicti?
The main concern is on the performance side, but other than that, we find it really helpful in identifying web vulner...
What do you like most about Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
In comparison with other tools, they're competitive. It is not more expensive than other solutions, but their pricing...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify. One day it may pass a scan with no issues, and the ...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. Son...
What do you like most about Veracode?
The SAST and DAST modules are great.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veracode?
The product’s price is a bit higher compared to other solutions. However, the tool provides good vulnerability and da...
 

Also Known As

Netsparker
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Manhattan Associates, Azalea Health, Sabre, QAD, Floor & Decor, Prophecy International, SchoolCNXT, Keap, Rekner, Cox Automotive, Automation Anywhere, State of Missouri and others.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: August 2025.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.