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

HCL AppScan vs Trustwave App Scanner [EOL] 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

HCL AppScan
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (15th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (14th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st)
Trustwave App Scanner [EOL]
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

Gladwin Christian - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Securityd276 - PeerSpot reviewer
Stable solution that has increased the maturity of our security program
I would like to see a little more flexibility with regards to setting up profiles for vulnerabilities. For the most part, it fits our needs but a little more flexibility would be great. I would also like to have more information on AI. If we start to deploy AI in our infrastructure, does it cover that as well?

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It highlights, with several grades of severity, the types of vulnerabilities, so we can focus on the most severe security vulnerabilities in the code."
"You can easily find particular features and functions through the UI."
"We use it as a security testing application."
"It has certainly helped us find vulnerabilities in our software, so this is priceless in the end."
"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."
"We leverage it as a quality check against code."
"We are now deploying less defects to production."
"It provides a better integration for our ecosystem."
"The stability is great. We haven't had any issues at all with it."
 

Cons

"One thing which I think can be improved is the CI/CD Integration"
"They have to improve support."
"It's a little bit basic when you talk about the Web Services. If AppScan improved its maturity on Web Services testing, that would be good."
"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."
"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 often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."
"Scans become slow on large websites."
"AppScan needs to improve its handling of false positives."
"I would like to see a little more flexibility with regards to setting up profiles for vulnerabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool was expensive."
"HCL AppScan is expensive."
"The price of HCL AppScan is okay, in my opinion. You just buy HCL AppScan and don't pay anything anymore, meaning it is just a one-time purchase."
"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."
"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."
"AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."
"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."
"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
869,089 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
No data available
 

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.
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...
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
Hailstorm, Cenzic Hailstorm
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
Leading Health Insurer
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: September 2025.
869,089 professionals have used our research since 2012.