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

HCL AppScan vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing 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 Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (23rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (20th)
OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
3rd
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
DevSecOps (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of HCL AppScan is 8.6%, down from 11.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 11.5%, up from 10.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing11.5%
HCL AppScan8.6%
Other79.9%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

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.
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

"For me, as a manager, it was the ease of use. Inserting security into the development process is not normally an easy project to do. The ability for the developer to actually use it and get results and focuses, that's what counted."
"AppScan seems to be very good at detecting reflected XSS vulnerabilities."
"This is a stable solution."
"It comes with all of the templates that we need. For example, we are a company that is regulated by PCI. In order to be PCI compliant, we have a lot of checks and procedures to which we have to comply."
"It identifies all the URLs and domains on its own and then performs tests and provides the results."
"It highlights, with several grades of severity, the types of vulnerabilities, so we can focus on the most severe security vulnerabilities in the code."
"IBM Applications Security has contributed to the maturity of our AppSec risk management program."
"The reporting part is the most valuable feature."
"The transaction recorder within WebInspect is easy to use, which is valuable for our team."
"The product is a good option for enterprise-level organizations."
"The user interface is ok and it is very simple to use."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"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."
"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
 

Cons

"They have to improve support."
"This product lacks in many areas, and so we are looking at other options."
"Many silly false positives are produced."
"A desktop version should be added."
"IBM Security AppScan needs to add performance optimization for quickly scanning the target web applications."
"The solution often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."
"I would like to see the roadmap for this product. We are still waiting to see it as we have only so many resources."
"The penetration testing feature should be included."
"This solution is very expensive."
"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."
"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."
"My advice to others using Fortify WebInspect is not to use it, there are better solutions in the market."
"A localized version, for example, in Korean would be a big improvement to this solution."
"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."
"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"HCL AppScan is expensive."
"The price is very expensive."
"AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."
"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."
"The solution is moderately priced."
"Pricing was the main reason that we went ahead with this solution as they were the lowest in the market."
"The solution is cheap."
"I rate the product's price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high. HCL AppScan is an expensive tool."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"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."
"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."
"This solution is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
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 Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

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 applica...
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...
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

IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
Aaron's
Find out what your peers are saying about HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.