Klocwork vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

The compared Perforce and OpenText solutions aren't in the same category. Perforce is ranked #17 in AS , with an average rating of 8.2, and holds a 1.4% mindshare in the category. OpenText is ranked #3 in DAST , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 10.6% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of Perforce users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Klocwork

Read 25 Klocwork reviews

3,478 Views
1,913 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Read 22 OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing reviews

2,921 Views
1,052 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Klocwork

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Klocwork and OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Klocwork vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Report (Updated: May 2022).

Buyer's Guide

Klocwork vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

May 2022

Download the complete report

Helped 881,227 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

Klocwork

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (17th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (14th), Static Code Analysis (3rd)

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd), DevSecOps (8th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Application Lifecycle Management solutions, they serve different purposes. Klocwork is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.4%, down 1.4% compared to last year.
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), holds 10.6% mindshare, up 9.2% since last year.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Klocwork	1.4%
SonarQube	17.9%
Checkmarx One	10.2%
Other	70.5%

Application Security Tools

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing	10.6%
Veracode	19.4%
Checkmarx One	17.2%
Other	52.8%

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

Featured Reviews

Krishna M Gopalakrishnan

Manager, Quality, Functional Safety, Cybersecurity Embedded Processing at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Experience with compliance improvements and efficiency boosts but static analysis engine shows a need for enhancement

One area for improvement is that when customers use different static analysis tools, they report more issues compared to Klocwork. The static analysis engine of Klocwork has areas that need improvement. Customers using different static analysis tools report more issues than with Klocwork, indicating that Klocwork's engine is not as superior. Klocwork should be able to analyze large codebases efficiently, supporting a desktop version for periodic small delta changes before pushing to the server.

Read full review

ArnabPaul

Cyber Security Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Enhancements in manual testing align with reporting and integration features

WebInspect works efficiently with Java-based or .NET based applications. However, it struggles with Salesforce applications, where it requires approximately 20-24 hours to crawl and audit but produces minimal findings, necessitating manual verification. The solution offers customization features for crawling and vulnerability detection. It includes various security frameworks and allows selection of specific vulnerability types to audit, such as OWASP Top 10 or JavaScript-based vulnerabilities. When working with APIs, we can select OWASP API Top 10. The tool also supports custom audit features by combining different security frameworks. For on-premises deployment, the setup is complex, particularly regarding SQL server configuration. Unlike Burp Suite or OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, which have simpler setup processes, WebInspect requires SQL server setup to function.

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

"The best advantage of Klocwork is the reduced setup time."

"There's a feature in Klocwork called 'on-the-fly analysis', which helps developers to find and fix the defects at the time of development itself."

"The most valuable feature of Klocwork is its reduced setup time."

"It's integrated into our CI, continuous integration."

"On-the-fly analysis and incremental analysis are the best parts of Klocwork. Currently, we are using both of these features very effectively."

"I like not having to dig through false positives. Chasing down a false positive can take anywhere from five minutes for a small easy one, then something that is complicated and goes through a whole bunch of different class cases, and it can take up to 45 minutes to an hour to find out if it is a false positive or not."

"Klocwork is user-friendly, with a client-server architecture that provides all needed compliance."

More Klocwork pros

"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."

"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."

"The accuracy of its scans is great."

"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."

"The transaction recorder within WebInspect is easy to use, which is valuable for our team."

"It is easy to use, and its reporting is fairly simple."

"It is scalable and very easy to use."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing pros

Cons

"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."

"I hope that in each new release they add new features relating to the addition of checkers, improving their analysis engines etc."

"The way to define the rules is too complex. The definition/rules for static analysis could be automated according to various SILs, so as to avoid confusion."

"I believe it should support more languages, such as Python and JavaScript."

"Even though it does the job, there's room for feature enhancements, such as integrations with Git for better tracking and notifications."

"There are too many warnings, and it requires expertise to determine the correct category for them."

"The main problem is that since it only parses the code, the warnings or the problems that are given as a result of the report can sometimes require a lot of effort to analyze."

"Klocwork has to improve its features to stay ahead of other free solutions."

More Klocwork cons

"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."

"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."

"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."

"We have often encountered scanning errors."

"Fortify WebInspect could improve user-friendliness. Additionally, it is very bulky to use."

"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."

"A localized version, for example, in Korean would be a big improvement to this solution."

"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution offers competitive pricing."

"When it comes to licensing, the solution has two packages, one for a fixed and the other for a floating server, with the former being more cost effective than the latter."

"The limitation that we have is that Klocwork is licensed to certain programs, and if you want to license them to other programs, you have to pay more money."

"Licensing fees are paid annually, but they also have a perpetual license."

"Klocwork is still tight on their licensing. If Klocwork would loosen up on the licensing, and where the license could be used, and how many different programs could be run on it, then we have several development programs that I would love to be able to use it for going forward."

"The pricing for Klocwork is very competitive if you compare it from apple to apple. It has competitive pricing regarding the licensing model and the per-license cost. Klocwork isn't a high-end investment for anyone deploying it; even SMBs can afford it. The Klocwork cost per user would depend on the license type, so I'm unable to mention a ballpark figure because it would depend on the type of installation and how the deployment will be, and the nodes to give an accurate calculation or figure. The total price depends on the package, so my company could never publish pricing for Klocwork on the website. My team first collects information from potential clients on the deployment scenario, project environment, etc., before suggesting a package for Klocwork. My rating for Klocwork in terms of pricing is a five because of its flexible license models. There's a license model for every type of organization, whether small, midsize, or enterprise, so it's a five out of five for me."

"There are other solutions on the market such as Microsoft Visual Studio. They have been adding more static code analysis features that come for free. It is getting better all the time. That is one of the possibilities is that we've been considering that we may stop using the Klocwork because it doesn't give us any added value."

"Klocwork should not to be quite so heavy handed on the licensing for very specific programs."

"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."

"This solution is very expensive."

"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."

"It’s a fair price for the solution."

"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."

"The price is okay."

"Its price is almost similar to the price of AppScan. Both of them are very costly. Its price could be reduced because it can be very costly for unlimited IT scans, etc. I'm not sure, but it can go up to $40,000 to $50,000 or more than that."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,227 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

24%

Computer Software Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Transportation Company

Government

15%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	12
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	12

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	15

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Klocwork?

Klocwork's pricing seems attractive, as it uses a per-user license model that does not have a lot of overhead.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Klocwork?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Klocwork?

I work on tools such as Klocwork, LDRA, as well as Jira and Confluence, focusing more on the software quality assurance aspect. We use Klocwork for coding and aggregate checks. We use it for static...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?

While I am not directly involved with licensing, I can share that our project's license for 1-9 applications costs between $15,000 to $19,000. In comparison, Burp Suite costs approximately $500 to ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Fortify WebInspect?

I am currently working with several tools. For Fortify, I use SCA and WebInspect. Apart from that, I use Burp Suite from PortSwigger. For API testing, I use Postman with Burp Suite or WebInspect fo...

See all answers

Comparisons

Coverity Static vs Klocwork

Compared 23% of the time

SonarQube vs Klocwork

Compared 21% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs Klocwork

Compared 10% of the time

Helix QAC vs Klocwork

Compared 8% of the time

Axivion Static Code Analysis vs Klocwork

Compared 5% of the time

More Klocwork Competitors

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 19% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 6% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 6% of the time

Acunetix vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 6% of the time

OWASP Zap vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 6% of the time

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Klocwork

January 2026

Download Klocwork product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

January 2026

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report

Download OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing product report

Also Known As

No data available

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect

Overview

Klocwork detects security, safety, and reliability issues in real-time by using this static code analysis toolkit that works alongside developers, finding issues as early as possible, and integrates with teams, supporting continuous integration and actionable reporting.

Perforce

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing offers robust scalability, ease of use, and high accuracy in scanning, making it a valuable tool for enterprises.

This security testing platform is known for its centralized dashboard, guided scans, and comprehensive reporting. It integrates seamlessly with tools like Fortify code scanner and supports extensive vulnerability detection and analysis, enhancing efficiency in security management. Despite its strengths, users suggest improvements in cloud integration, cost-effectiveness, and installation processes. Faster scans, reduced false positives, and improved mobile testing features are also desired.

What are the key features of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing?

Scalability: Easily adapts to changing enterprise needs.
Ease of Use: User-friendly interface with guided scans.
Comprehensive Reporting: Detailed vulnerability analysis and reporting.
Integration Capabilities: Works with Fortify code scanner and user authentication scanning.
Wide Vulnerability Detection: Identifies extensive security vulnerabilities.

What benefits should users expect from reviews?

Efficient Vulnerability Management: Streamlines security management in development environments.
Detailed Analysis: Provides in-depth insights into security issues.
Quick Setup: Easy to deploy within existing systems.
Enterprise Preference: Supports enterprise environments efficiently.

In industries like BFSI, OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is employed for performance network application testing, dynamic and static application security testing, and code checks. Security and QA teams use it in development processes to ensure application security prior to release, proving integral in both enterprise and testing environments.

OpenText

Sample Customers

ACCESS Co Ltd, Risk-AI, Winbond Electronics, Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute, University of Southern California, Alebra Technologies, SIMULIA, Risk Management Solutions, Brigham Young University, SRD, HRL

Aaron's

Buyer's Guide

Klocwork vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

May 2022

Free Report: Klocwork vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Find out what your peers are saying about Klocwork vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: May 2022.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,227 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Klocwork vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report.

We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.