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

HCL AppScan vs Kiuwan comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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

HCL AppScan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
24th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
20th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (7th)
Kiuwan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
34th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
29th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of HCL AppScan is 2.4%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.2%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
HCL AppScan2.4%
Kiuwan1.2%
Other96.4%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Ravi Khanchandani - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder Director at Techsa Services
Has improved identification of encryption and authentication issues across cloud and on-prem applications
During the learning curve of onboarding HCL AppScan, we learned that HCL has altered the portfolio and now offers HCL AppScan 360, which has a much better look and feel with an improved user interface. However, there is one feature called SCA, which stands for Software Composition Analysis, that could be improved. When I'm doing an application scan, HCL AppScan has the ability to generate information about what components are in use. For example, if I'm scanning a web application, it shows me the various components being used. It tells me whether I have Java libraries, .NET frameworks, or other log management libraries such as Log4j, and what versions of those specific components are present. I would like to see more detailed reports from the tool. Currently, you can find out the components belonging to a specific software, but if detailed reporting became available, you would be in a better position to identify vulnerabilities. For instance, I could identify that I had the Log4j vulnerability and know that I need to fix my application accordingly. If they add the features I'm describing, I would consider giving them a higher rating. However, I've only been experienced with the product for three months.
Mustufa Bhavnagarwala - PeerSpot reviewer
CyberRisk Solution Advisor at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement
Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran the tool and tried to scan the repository to find the security issues. The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"IBM AppScan has made our work easy, as we can do four to five scans of websites at a time, which saves time when it comes to vulnerability."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The HCL AppScan performance is both stable and reliable."
"It's honestly one of the best products in the application security portfolio."
"The reporting part is the most valuable feature."
"It has certainly improved our organization in terms of quality of solutions that are developed."
"The security and the dashboard are the most valuable features."
"It has certainly helped us find vulnerabilities in our software, so this is priceless in the end."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable in Kiuwan is the speed of scanning. Compared to other SaaS tools I have used, Kiuwan is much quicker in performing scans. I have not yet used it on a large code base, but from what I have experienced, it is efficient and accurate. Additionally, I have used it both manually and in an automated pipeline, and both methods have been effective. The speed of scanning is what makes it valuable to me."
"I've tried many open source applications and the remediation or correction actions that were provided by Kiuwan were very good in comparison."
"With Kiuwan, we were able to help our clients get a better visibility of their development activities and to mitigate risks."
"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."
"Lifecycle features, because they permit us to show non-technical people the risk and costs hidden into the code due to bad programming practices."
"We are using this solution to increase the quality of our software and to test the vulnerabilities in our tools before the customers find them."
"The technical support is very good, and we have received valid answers to our questions."
"We have been using this solution for one and a half years."
 

Cons

"We have experienced challenges when trying to integrate this solution with other products. When you compare it with the other SecOps products, the quality of the output is too low. It is not a new-age product. It is very outdated."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"They could add a software component analysis tool."
"Visibility is an issue for us. Our partners were not even aware that we had an integration with AppSense."
"There is one feature called SCA, which stands for Software Composition Analysis, that could be improved."
"The pricing has room for improvement."
"There are so many lines of code with so many different categories that I am likely to get lost. ​"
"The tool should improve its output. Scanning is not a challenge anymore since there are many such tools available in the market. The product needs to focus on how its output is being used by end users. It should be also more user-friendly. One of the major challenges is in the tool's integration with applications that need to be scanned. Sometimes, the scanning is not proper."
"I would like to see additional languages supported."
"More languages and frameworks would enhance this tool."
"It could improve its scalability abilities."
"We faced a lot of problems with the initial setup and support gave us difficulties around the installation."
"For mobile development, we are not too experienced, and it is not the perfect tool because the integration with certain products is very manual."
"In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"The development-to-delivery phase."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the product's pricing a nine out of ten. The product's pricing is expensive compared to the features that they offer."
"Pricing was the main reason that we went ahead with this solution as they were the lowest in the market."
"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."
"The product is moderately priced, though it's an investment due to extensive code analysis needs."
"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."
"The tool was expensive."
"The solution is cheap."
"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."
"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."
"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."
"Check with your account manager."
"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."
"This solution is cheaper than other tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?
During the learning curve of onboarding HCL AppScan, we learned that HCL has altered the portfolio and now offers HCL AppScan 360, which has a much better look and feel with an improved user interf...
What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?
I'm currently working with BigFix and HCL AppScan. At least three people in my company are using HCL AppScan. Since we are a reseller, we run it in both lab environments and live production app...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HCL AppScan?
AppScan is considered more cost-effective than Veracode, although I have not updated the exact pricing details. Companies often choose based on budget constraints, with Veracode being on the higher...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial
Find out what your peers are saying about HCL AppScan vs. Kiuwan and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.