No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

GuardRails vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 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

GuardRails
Ranking in DevSecOps
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
9.2
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (24th)
OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Ranking in DevSecOps
10th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the DevSecOps category, the mindshare of GuardRails is 1.8%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 7.0%, up from 6.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
DevSecOps Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing7.0%
GuardRails1.8%
Other91.2%
DevSecOps
 

Featured Reviews

Sarthak Chavda - PeerSpot reviewer
Trainee at Veefin
Shifted security left and automated pull request checks to improve code hygiene and collaboration
Regarding GuardRails's AI capabilities, its governance and security controls are highly robust, requiring minimal, well-defined, read-only API access to codebases, and the central dashboard provides sufficient visibility into which repositories have high-risk patterns. Adding more advanced role-based access control inside the management panel would be perfect. The accuracy and reliability of GuardRails's output are impressive, with recommendations being highly practical and reliable. While any static analysis platform will yield occasional false positives on edge case logic, GuardRails filters out a lot of standard noise compared to legacy tools, making its output highly actionable for developers. The cloud-hosted SaaS deployment of GuardRails is used, which integrates directly with the managed version control system via secure OAuth webhooks. GuardRails is deployed on AWS as the cloud provider. GuardRails was purchased directly through a vendor rather than through the AWS Marketplace. GuardRails integrates with existing CI/CD tools and workflows by instantly connecting with version control systems like GitHub, GitLab, and Bitbucket via OAuth or app. GuardRails handles compliance requirements by being audit-ready, tracking, and automatically logging the security result of every commit and pull request, providing auditors with permanent, tamper-proof documentation of continuous code governance, industry framework mapping, proactive cloud safeguard, and data privacy gardening. Its sovereign and air-gapped deployment even offers an on-premise model, allowing highly regulated enterprises to keep all scanning data within their own network boundaries to meet strict data residence laws. GuardRails supports the team in onboarding new developers and training them on secure coding practices by having zero local setup. It hooks directly into repository layers, so engineers do not have to install any local CLI tools or IDE. Regarding open-source dependency scanning and vulnerability management, GuardRails provides deep dependency tracking that scans package managers and lock files to automatically uncover security flaws in both direct and deeply nested open-source libraries, including automated SBOM generation, real-time CVE spotting, upgrade guidance, license compliance checks, and monitoring of open-source licensing models in real time to prevent legally problematic copyleft compliance issues from compromising proprietary source. GuardRails supports collaboration between security and development teams by becoming the unified source of truth that bridges the organizational gap, providing a single platform where the security team sets high-level governance policy and development teams view daily actionable code. This removes the security cop friction and streamlines exception triage with shared responsibility models. My advice to others looking into using GuardRails is to start by activating it on the most critical repository first, working closely with engineering leads to establish a clear baseline for what counts as a breaking vulnerability, tuning the initial rule set to fit workflows, and then rolling out across the organization. I would rate GuardRails an eight out of ten.
AP
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have achieved roughly a forty percent reduction in production-level vulnerabilities and eliminated accidental credential leaks into our Git history entirely."
"GuardRails has positively impacted the organization by fostering a collaborative DevSecOps culture, where developers actively fix security issues as they write code, leading to massive improvements in code hygiene and the DevOps team spending significantly less time reviewing code configuration vulnerabilities after deployment."
"The tool provides comprehensive vulnerability assessments which help ensure our deliverables are as free from vulnerabilities as possible. It has also streamlined our web application vulnerability assessments, assisting us in delivering secure applications to our clients."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"It is a good product, comparable to AppScan, quite scalable, and offers good cost/value with the support and backing from Micro Focus."
"The solution is easy to use."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"Easy to scan and then share scan reports, it has definitely streamlined many processes."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"There are lots of small settings and tools, like an HTTP editor, that are very useful."
 

Cons

"To improve GuardRails, more granular customization options for exclusions would be beneficial, especially when dealing with legacy codebases where certain non-critical alerts should be ignored without disabling an entire scanning engine."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
"I want to enhance automation. Currently, Fortify WebInspect can scan and find vulnerabilities, but users with specific skills need to interpret the results and understand how to address them."
"We have had a problem with authentification."
"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."
"My advice to others using Fortify WebInspect is not to use it, there are better solutions in the market."
"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."
"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."
"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"This solution is very expensive."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"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."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"The price is okay."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which DevSecOps solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 ...
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
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 produ...
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...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Aaron's
Find out what your peers are saying about GuardRails vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.