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

Fortify Software Security Center vs Selenium HQ 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

Fortify Software Security C...
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (28th)
Selenium HQ
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (6th), Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Fortify Software Security Center is designed for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and holds a mindshare of 0.4%, up 0.3% compared to last year.
Selenium HQ, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 3.5% mindshare, down 4.8% since last year.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Jonathan Steyn - PeerSpot reviewer
Comprehensive vulnerability analysis and customization features with decent pricing
Software Security Center is highly customizable and helps me test all vulnerability data against the latest conventions like OWASP Top Ten, CVE Top twenty-five, and several other legal compliances. WebInspect supports a number of APIs and web endpoints. I find its feature of macro recording allows for testing vulnerabilities during multi-factor authentication sessions very valuable. I appreciate the ability to further analyze data with tools like Audit Workbench.
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation in testing processes sees improvement with multi-browser support and easier website interactions
Selenium HQ could improve by including a robust reporting framework, eliminating the need for external frameworks. The tool could simplify object identification, enabling users to generate XPaths without requiring detailed DOM understanding. Additionally, an automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This is a stable solution at the end of the day."
"You can easily download the tool's rule packs and update them."
"The reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."
"The overall rating for this tool is ten out of ten."
"Fortify Analytics' AI function helps scan and provides more detailed explanations and recommendations about vulnerabilities."
"I like the explanation of issues provided by Fortify Software Security Center."
"Software Security Center is highly customizable and helps me test all vulnerability data against the latest conventions like OWASP Top Ten, CVE Top twenty-five, and several other legal compliances."
"For me, the most valuable feature of Selenium lies in its ability to help us find elements quickly. Apart from that, the driver interface is really useful, too. When we implement the Selenium driver interface, we can easily navigate through all of the pages and sections of an app, including performing things like clicking, putting through SendKeys, scrolling down, tagging, and all the other actions we need to test for in an application."
"What I like the most about this product is that it gives us a lot of freedom to code anything, there is no restriction on the type of function you can do."
"I am impressed with the product's ability to catch content from website."
"The product is quite stable."
"Its biggest advantage is that it is very customizable."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are that it is free and allows using any programming language."
"My customer previously validated every file and it would take almost 15-20 minutes for a document. They used to randomly select and test only 100 out of the thousands, maybe 85,000, files, to pick up sampling. Each file would take around 20 to 25 minutes, so we were not able to do it manually, but with the help of Selenium, we were able to test all the files in two days. It saves a lot of time."
"It is programming language agnostic, you can write tests in most currently used languages."
 

Cons

"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."
"The product's overlap feature is restrictive and requires more customization efforts, which can be expensive."
"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."
"I am not satisfied with the percentage of false positives, which is around eighteen percent."
"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."
"This solution is difficult to implement, and it should be made more comfortable for the end-users."
"We are having issues with false positives that need to be resolved."
"The solution could be improved regarding communication with browsers, as it is slower and a bit tricky compared to other frameworks. However, with the latest changes involving BiDirectional communication, it is becoming a top choice in automation frameworks."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
"I would like for the next release to support parallel testing."
"Currently, we are using Excel as our data source. I don't know if we have that capability to provide different data sources such as SQL Server, CSV, or maybe some other databases, so that kind of capability would be great."
"Selenium has been giving us failures sometimes. It is not working one hundred percent of the time when we are creating elements. They need to improve the stability of the solution."
"One drawback to Selenium is that there is nothing like an object repository, such as that found in QTP, especially considering continuous integration practices that have become common nowadays."
"Selenium uses a layer-based approach that is somewhat slower than Eggplant when it comes to executing code."
"In the future, Selenium should be able to automate desktop-based applications, as it is not currently able to handle non-web-based, Windows-based applications."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is a costly solution that could be cheaper."
"As a Fortify partner company providing technical support, I find the product expensive in our country, where local, inexpensive products are available."
"The solution is priced fair."
"It is free."
"Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs."
"The product is open-source and free."
"Selenium HQ is a free, open-source solution."
"The solution is open-source, so it is 100% free with no hidden charges."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"It is all free."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Software Security Center?
In the beginning, it was difficult for me to verify that our usage of Fortify Software Security Center corresponded to the license and criteria. Now, we have negotiated a number of details to respe...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Software Security Center?
I would like the false positive issue to diminish. I have experienced a lot of false positives, but I think this is due to using an older version. I hope the new version will resolve my problem.
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Software Security Center?
They use it to scan applications and fix bugs, which are my customers' main use cases for Fortify Software Security Center. As a reseller, I sell this product to provide application security becaus...
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
I will give an eight for my satisfaction with the pricing and licensing costs of Selenium HQ.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Software Security Center, Application Security Center, HPE Application Security Center, WebInspect
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Neosecure, Acxiom, Skandinavisk Data Center A/S, Parkeon
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: August 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.