HCL AppScan vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

HCLSoftware and OpenText are both solutions in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category. HCLSoftware is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.3, while OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.0. HCLSoftware holds a 14.3% mindshare in DAST, compared to OpenText’s 17.9% mindshare. Additionally, 84% of HCLSoftware users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

HCL AppScan

Read 43 HCL AppScan reviews

4,583 Views
779 Comparison Views

84% willing to recommend

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Read 22 OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing reviews

3,330 Views
866 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

HCL AppScan

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

HCL AppScan and OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing are prominent tools in the application security testing category. HCL AppScan tends to have the upper hand due to its ease of use and extensive integration with development processes.

Features: HCL AppScan shines in detecting vulnerabilities like XSS and SQL injection with a low false-positive rate. It supports multiple languages, custom rules, and rapid API scanning, enhancing its usability. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing offers robust scanning capabilities but struggles with integration.

Room for Improvement: HCL AppScan needs improvement in false positive reduction and better integration with CI/CD pipelines and cloud services like Microsoft's Azure. It also requires enhanced user support and interface refinements. For OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, there is a need for faster scans and improved pricing transparency. Both tools need improved support for mobile and cloud applications and continuous updates to handle new vulnerabilities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: HCL AppScan provides flexible deployment options, including on-premises and cloud solutions, but has faced issues with slow customer service after transitioning from IBM. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing also offers diverse deployment models and is noted for its responsive technical support.

Pricing and ROI: HCL AppScan is perceived as expensive but offers a significant ROI due to comprehensive features leading to vulnerability reduction and cost savings. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is considered costly and faces challenges with pricing due to bundled licenses, making it less accessible for smaller enterprises.

To learn more, read our detailed HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 867,826 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

HCL AppScan

Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

1st

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

5.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (15th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (15th)

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

2nd

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

DevSecOps (8th)

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of HCL AppScan is 14.3%, down from 23.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 17.9%, down from 22.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
HCL AppScan	14.3%
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing	17.9%
Other	67.8%

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

Featured Reviews

Gladwin Christian

QA manager at SmartStream Technologies ltd.

A useful tool to scan applications that can be easily installed

Given that we have been using HCL AppScan for many years, I think the setup process is not difficult at all. Sometimes, some issues stop or prevent my company from moving forward with the product's setup phase. We have to call HCL's support team and engage in long discussions to smoothly carry out the setup phase. In general, the product's setup phase is not difficult in our company. The solution is deployed on an on-premises model. The licenses for the solution are available only on cloud deployments nowadays. The solution is already installed in our environment. Every time a new release or software comes out from HCL, our company does a scan, which takes maybe a day or two.

Read full review

Navin N

Global ISO 27001 Program Lead at DXC Technology

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…

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 platform has valuable security features, helping us identify sensitive code issues and the possibility of internal applications' exposure to external threats."

"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase."

"The UI was very intuitive."

"We are now deploying less defects to production."

"AppScan's most valuable features include its ability to identify vulnerabilities accurately, provide detailed remediation steps, and the newly introduced AI-powered features that enhance its functionality further."

"The solution is easy to use."

"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution...The initial setup or installation of HCL AppScan is easy."

"The static scans are good, and the SaaS as well."

More HCL AppScan pros

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

"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities. It's better at it than other products."

"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."

"I'm sorry, but there is no review content provided to extract a quote from."

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

"The accuracy of its scans is great."

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

"Technical support has been good."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing pros

Cons

"AppScan needs to improve its handling of false positives."

"Improvement can be done as per customer requirements."

"There is not a central management for static and dynamic."

"Many silly false positives are produced."

"HCL AppScan needs to improve security."

"I think being able to search across more containers, especially some of the docker elements. We need a little tighter integration there. That's the only thing I can see at this point."

"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."

"The solution often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."

More HCL AppScan cons

"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."

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

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

"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 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."

"Not sufficiently compatible with some of our systems."

"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."

"The solution is cheap."

"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."

"HCL AppScan is expensive."

"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."

"The price is very expensive."

"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."

More HCL AppScan pricing and cost advice

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

"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."

"The price is okay."

"This solution is very expensive."

"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."

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

"It’s a fair price for the solution."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

867,826 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Government

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Government

15%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Computer Software Company

10%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	13
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	31

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

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about HCL AppScan?

The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase.

See all answers

What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?

AppScan needs to improve its handling of false positives. It also requires enhancements in customer support, similar to what Veracode provides. Regularly scheduling calls with clients to discuss fe...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?

The primary use case for AppScan is for security purposes. I compare AppScan with other tools such as Veracode. We use AppScan for vulnerability detection and auto-remediation of vulnerabilities wi...

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?

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...

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

Acunetix vs HCL AppScan

Compared 12% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs HCL AppScan

Compared 12% of the time

Veracode vs HCL AppScan

Compared 11% of the time

OWASP Zap vs HCL AppScan

Compared 8% of the time

GitHub Code Scanning vs HCL AppScan

Compared 4% of the time

More HCL AppScan Competitors

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 17% of the time

OWASP Zap vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 11% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 8% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 8% of the time

Acunetix vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 7% of the time

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan

September 2025

Download HCL AppScan product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

September 2025

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report

Download OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing product report

Also Known As

IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect

Overview

IBM Security AppScan enhances web application security and mobile application security, improves application security program management and strengthens regulatory compliance. By scanning your web and mobile applications prior to deployment, AppScan enables you to identify security vulnerabilities and generate reports and fix recommendations.

HCLSoftware

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

Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT

Aaron's

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

July 2025

Free Report: HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Find out what your peers are saying about HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

867,826 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report.

See our list of best Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) vendors.

We monitor all Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) 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.