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

NowSecure vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing 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

NowSecure
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (39th), Mobile App Testing Tools (18th)
OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd), DevSecOps (10th)
 

Featured Reviews

AN
Scalable and reliable, but dynamic analysis needs improvement
I would advise others when testing using NowSecure to do secondary tests with other tools. For example, set it up in the local environment and recheck what the results of the reports are. Since the dynamic results are less accurate, I would suggest using static analysis. I rate NowSecure a seven out of ten.
Navin N - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective scanning of diverse file extensions with fast reporting and issue resolution
We develop software packages for clients, and these clients are mostly in the BFSI sector. The packages need to be scanned, and we engage Fortify WebInspect for this.  Customers typically perform their own application pen tests, but in some cases, we have engagements where customers want us to scan…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the ability to download an application without actually putting in the APK. It gives us an option to put the APK in if we want to but we can download it from the App Store and Play Store."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"When we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities. Comparison is easy in SSC."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"It is easy to use, and its reporting is fairly simple."
"The feature that has been most influential in identifying vulnerabilities is its ability to crawl the website, understand the structure, and analyze the network packets sent and received."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."
"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."
 

Cons

"In this solution, there are two kinds of testing, static analysis, and dynamic analysis. There needs some improvement in testing with dynamic analysis because I have found it is not accurate"
"Fortify WebInspect could improve user-friendliness. Additionally, it is very bulky to use."
"The solution needs better integration with Microsoft's Azure Cloud or an extension of Azure DevOps. In fact, it should better integrate with any cloud provider. Right now, it's quite difficult to integrate with that solution, from the cloud perspective."
"The scanner could be better."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
"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."
"Fortify WebInspect's shortcoming stems from the fact that it is a very expensive product in Korea, which makes it difficult for its potential customers to introduce the product in their IT environment."
"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."
"We have often encountered scanning errors."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"The price is okay."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"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."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"This solution is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
861,034 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
16%
Insurance Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Government
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Fortify WebInspect?
The solution's technical support was very helpful.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?
The price of Fortify WebInspect is high, with the cost depending on the number of virtual users. It is approximately 25% higher than other solutions.
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate. The cost of the license depends on the number of virtual users and, in comparison to...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Vaporstream, FIS, MEA Financial, Silent Circle, Capital One, Citi, EY, EMC, Emerson, Kaiser Permanente, The Home Depot, Humana, Shell, Kellogg's, TD Bank, VMware
Aaron's
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Mobile App Testing Tools. Updated: June 2025.
861,034 professionals have used our research since 2012.