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

Fortify Software Security Center vs Snyk comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 11, 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 Software Security C...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
21st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Snyk
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (16th), Application Security Tools (7th), GRC (4th), Cloud Management (11th), Vulnerability Management (13th), Container Security (6th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (1st), Software Development Analytics (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (15th), DevSecOps (2nd), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (2nd), AI Security (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Fortify Software Security Center is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Snyk is 5.3%, up from 5.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Snyk5.3%
Fortify Software Security Center0.9%
Other93.8%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Diego Caicedo Lescano - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Innovation Officer at SAGGA
Enables centralized analysis and improves governance through seamless tool integration
The main use case for Fortify Software Security Center is exceptional because we have governance and control through that console. You can centralize both static analysis and dynamic analysis, and correlate both analyses in one tool to get better results by combining those independent results from each solution. That is outstanding, and there is no tool I have seen on the market that offers these capabilities. I appreciate the interoperability with other solutions from Fortify Software Security Center. Because we are using Kiuwan, you can run Kiuwan analyses and integrate them with Fortify Software Security Center to get those results in a single console. That is a good console for centralizing things in one point. That is one of the best features of the on-premises Fortify.
Abhishek-Goyal - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
Improves security posture by actively reducing critical vulnerabilities and guiding remediation
Snyk's main features include open-source vulnerability scanning, code security, container security, infrastructure as code security, risk-based prioritization, development-first integration, continuous monitoring and alerting, automation, and remediation. The best features I appreciate are the vulnerability checking, vulnerability scanning, and code security capabilities, as Snyk scans all open-source dependencies for known vulnerabilities and helps with license compliance for open-source components. Snyk integrates into IDEs, allowing issues to be caught as they appear in the code dynamically and prioritizes risk while providing remediation advice. Snyk provides actionable remediation advice on where vulnerabilities can exist and where code security is compromised, automatically scanning everything and providing timely alerts. Snyk has positively impacted my organization by improving the security posture across all software repositories, resulting in fewer critical vulnerabilities, more confidence in overall product security, and faster security compliance for project clients. Snyk has helped reduce vulnerabilities significantly. Initially, the repository had 17 to 31 critical and high vulnerabilities, but Snyk has helped manage them down to just five vulnerabilities, which are now lower and not high or critical.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's very important because they want to scan their source code every day, so we provide CICD integration to our customers so they can auto build and auto test every day, get reports, and fix issues."
"The overall rating for this tool is ten out of ten."
"I like the explanation of issues provided by Fortify Software Security Center."
"Fortify Analytics' AI function helps scan and provides more detailed explanations and recommendations about vulnerabilities."
"The main use case for Fortify Software Security Center is exceptional because we have governance and control through that console."
"The reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."
"This is a stable solution at the end of the day."
"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."
"Provides clear information and is easy to follow with good feedback regarding code practices."
"The dependency checks of the libraries are very valuable, but the licensing part is also very important because, with open source components, licensing can be all over the place. Our project is not an open source project, but we do use quite a lot of open source components and we want to make sure that we don't have surprises in there."
"The most valuable feature of Snyk is the SBOM."
"I think all the standard features are quite useful when it comes to software component scanning, but I also like the new features they're coming out with, such as container scanning, secrets scanning, and static analysis with SAST."
"Snyk has given us really good results because it is fully automated. We don't have to scan projects every time to find vulnerabilities, as it already stores the dependencies that we are using. It monitors 24/7 to find out if there are any issues that have been reported out on the Internet."
"There are many valuable features. For example, the way the scanning feature works. The integration is cool because I can integrate it and I don't need to wait until the CACD, I can plug it in to our local ID, and there I can do the scanning. That is the part I like best."
"From the software composition analysis perspective, it first makes sure that we understand what is happening from a third-party perspective for the particular product that we use. This is very difficult when you are building software and incorporating dependencies from other libraries, because those dependencies have dependencies and that chain of dependencies can go pretty deep. There could be a vulnerability in something that is seven layers deep, and it would be very difficult to understand that is even affecting us. Therefore, Snyk provides fantastic visibility to know, "Yes, we have a problem. Here is where it ultimately comes from." It may not be with what we're incorporating, but something much deeper than that."
"Snyk categorizes the level of vulnerability into high, medium, and low, which helps organizations prioritize which issues to tackle first."
 

Cons

"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."
"I am not satisfied with the percentage of false positives, which is around eighteen percent."
"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."
"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 product's overlap feature is restrictive and requires more customization efforts, which can be expensive."
"The support for Fortify on-premises is the same as for the other products. I would say the support is not good and I would rate it a three out of ten."
"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."
"Although Snyk is strong, sometimes it flags vulnerabilities that are not reachable, not exploitable, and not relevant to a project."
"The solution could improve the reports. They have been working on improving the reports but more work could be done."
"The feature for automatic fixing of security breaches could be improved."
"I would like to give further ability to grouping code repositories, in such a way that you could group them by the teams that own them, then produce alerting to those teams. The way that we are seeing it right now, the alerting only goes to a couple of places. I wish we could configure the code to go to different places."
"Offering API access in the lower or free open-source tiers would be better. That would help our customers. If you don't have an enterprise plan, it becomes challenging to integrate with the rest of the systems. Our customers would like to have some open-source integrations in the next release."
"The log export function could be easier when shipping logs to other platforms such as Splunk."
"Because Snyk has so many integrations and so many things it can do, it's hard to really understand all of them and to get that information to each team that needs it... If there were more self-service, perhaps tutorials or overviews for new teams or developers, so that they could click through and see things themselves, that would help."
"We would like to have upfront knowledge on how easy it should be to just pull in an upgraded dependency, e.g., even introduce full automation for dependencies supposed to have no impact on the business side of things. Therefore, we would like some output when you get the report with the dependencies. We want to get additional information on the expected impact of the business code that is using the dependency with the newer version. This probably won't be easy to add, but it would be helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As a Fortify partner company providing technical support, I find the product expensive in our country, where local, inexpensive products are available."
"This is a costly solution that could be cheaper."
"The solution is priced fair."
"Snyk is a premium-priced product, so it's kind of expensive. The big con that I find frustrating is when a company charges extra for single sign-on (SSO) into their SaaS app. Snyk is one of the few that I'm willing to pay that add-on charge, but generally I disqualify products that charge an extra fee to do integrated authentication to our identity provider, like Okta or some other SSO. That is a big negative. We had to pay extra for that. That little annoyance aside, it is expensive. You get a lot out of it, but you're paying for that premium."
"It is pretty expensive. It is not a cheap product."
"You can get a good deal with Snyk for pricing. It's a little expensive, but it is worth it."
"With Snyk, you get what you pay for. It is not a cheap solution, but you get a comprehensiveness and level of coverage that is very good. The dollars in the security budget only go so far. If I can maximize my value and be able to have some funds left over for other initiatives, I want to do that. That is what drives me to continue to say, "What's out there in the market? Snyk's expensive, but it's good. Is there something as good, but more affordable?" Ultimately, I find we could go cheaper, but we would lose the completeness of vision or scope. I am not willing to do that because Snyk does provide a pretty important benefit for us."
"Compared to Veracode, Snyk is definitely a cheaper tool."
"It's good value. That's the primary thing. It's not cheap-cheap, but it's good value."
"The price of the solution is expensive compared to other solutions."
"The pricing is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
879,899 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise21
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Software Security Center?
In my opinion, there are no areas that could be improved with Fortify Software Security Center. I would say it is a good product and a mature product. However, the SAST has many improvement areas. ...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Software Security Center?
We have installed Fortify Static Code Analysis, SAST, in Ecuador in two customers. The Fortify ScanCentral includes three components: SAST, Fortify Software Security Center, and the WebInspect.
How does Snyk compare with SonarQube?
Snyk does a great job identifying and reducing vulnerabilities. This solution is fully automated and monitors 24/7 to find any issues reported on the internet. It will store dependencies that you a...
What do you like most about Snyk?
The most effective feature in securing project dependencies stems from its ability to highlight security vulnerabilities.
What needs improvement with Snyk?
There are a lot of false positives that need to be identified and separated. The inclusion of AI to remove false positives would be beneficial. So far, I've not seen any AI features to enhance vuln...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Software Security Center, Application Security Center, HPE Application Security Center, WebInspect
Fugue, Snyk AppRisk
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Neosecure, Acxiom, Skandinavisk Data Center A/S, Parkeon
StartApp, Segment, Skyscanner, DigitalOcean, Comic Relief
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify Software Security Center vs. Snyk and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,899 professionals have used our research since 2012.