Fortify Software Security Center vs Software Risk Manager ASPM comparison

OpenText and Black Duck are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. OpenText is ranked #19 with an average rating of 9.0, while Black Duck is ranked #29. OpenText holds a 1.3% mindshare in SAST, compared to Black Duck’s 1.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution.

Fortify Software Security C...

Read 8 Fortify Software Security Center reviews

1,316 Views
1,263 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Software Risk Manager ASPM

Read 1 Software Risk Manager ASPM review

1,390 Views
1,001 Comparison Views

0% willing to recommend

Fortify Software Security C...

Software Risk Manager ASPM

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 2026

Fortify Software Security Center and Software Risk Manager ASPM are competing products in application security. Software Risk Manager ASPM appears to have the upper hand due to its robust features, despite higher costs, which many find justifiable.

Features: Fortify Software Security Center provides comprehensive static application security testing, offering detailed insights and remediation guidance along with a centralized dashboard for managing security vulnerabilities. Software Risk Manager ASPM includes advanced analytics and risk assessment capabilities, enabling proactive threat management and prioritization of security issues.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Fortify Software Security Center supports straightforward on-premises deployment with reliable customer support for smooth implementation. Software Risk Manager ASPM offers a cloud-based deployment model, providing flexibility and faster integration, although initial configuration may be complex.

Pricing and ROI: Fortify Software Security Center focuses on competitive pricing to maximize ROI through efficient vulnerability management and strong customer service. Software Risk Manager ASPM, with its higher setup cost, justifies it with an extensive feature set that could lead to higher long-term gains and risk mitigation efficiency.

To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 885,667 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 Software Security C...

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

19th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

4.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Software Risk Manager ASPM

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

29th

Average Rating

0.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (21st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (14th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Fortify Software Security Center is 1.3%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Software Risk Manager ASPM is 1.0%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Fortify Software Security Center	1.3%
Software Risk Manager ASPM	1.0%
Other	97.7%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Diego Caicedo Lescano

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.

Read full review

Saravanan_Radhakrishnan

Senior Manager at Happiest Minds Technologies

Facilitates continuous assessment of applications, covering both static and dynamic security aspects

Code Dx lacks one aspect, the dynamic security part, known as DAST. It's not an on-premise solution; it's in the cloud now. There are compliance standards and data standards where the customer might need to have the data on-premises for dynamic security testing. So that is one shortfall. An area of improvement could be developing an on-premise DAST solution. The current one is a complete cloud-based solution, and that can be one of the areas of improvement.

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

"This is a stable solution at the end of the day."

"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 reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."

"The main use case for Fortify Software Security Center is exceptional because we have governance and control through that console."

"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."

"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."

More Fortify Software Security Center pros

"The customers were looking for something around static security and dynamic security, and in all those areas, they were looking for an industry leader with a proven solution. Synopsys is a Gartner leader, so I position this particular technology for the technical pre-sales part of it."

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."

"This solution is difficult to implement, and it should be made more comfortable for the end-users."

"I am not satisfied with the percentage of false positives, which is around eighteen percent."

"We are having issues with false positives that need to be resolved."

"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."

"The initial setup of this solution is very complex. Specifically, the integration between other parts of the solution is difficult."

"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."

More Fortify Software Security Center cons

"The initial setup is a bit challenging because things are not easy. It needs a lot of technology adaptability plus the customer's environment-specific use cases."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is a costly solution that could be cheaper."

"The solution is priced fair."

"As a Fortify partner company providing technical support, I find the product expensive in our country, where local, inexpensive products are available."

"It is more of an enterprise solution for budget-conscious customers. So, it's moderately priced. It's not for everybody."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

885,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

Construction Company

Financial Services Firm

16%

University

10%

Manufacturing Company

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	3

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Software Security Center?

The pricing for the on-premises Fortify is expensive.

See all answers

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. ...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Checkmarx One vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 24% of the time

Checkmarx IaC Security / KICS vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 13% of the time

SonarQube vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 8% of the time

Coverity Static vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

More Fortify Software Security Center Competitors

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Software Risk Manager ASPM

Compared 20% of the time

Polaris Platform vs Software Risk Manager ASPM

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs Software Risk Manager ASPM

Compared 8% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Software Risk Manager ASPM

Compared 7% of the time

Snyk vs Software Risk Manager ASPM

Compared 6% of the time

More Software Risk Manager ASPM Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

March 2026

Download Fortify Software Security Center product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)

March 2026

Download Software Risk Manager ASPM product report

Also Known As

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

Code Dx

Overview

Software Security Center enables management, development, and security teams to work together to triage, track, validate, automate, and manage software security activities.

OpenText

Software Risk Manager is an application security posture management (ASPM) solution that enables security and development teams to manage their application security programs at enterprise scale. By unifying policy, test orchestration, correlation, prioritization, and built-in static application security testing (SAST) and software composition analysis (SCA) engines, organizations can streamline their security activities across the enterprise.

Black Duck

Sample Customers

Neosecure, Acxiom, Skandinavisk Data Center A/S, Parkeon

Discover why companies like: CGI said, "Synopsys and Software Risk Manager have provided the results we’re looking for".

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

March 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

885,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.