Fortify Software Security Center vs Invicti comparison

Fortify Software Security C...

Read 31 Invicti reviews

3,717 Views
2,379 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Fortify Software Security Center and Invicti are prominent tools in the software security domain, each offering unique capabilities. Invicti appears to have the upper hand with its superior features, which users find justify its price.

Features: Fortify Software Security Center features comprehensive vulnerability detection across various programming languages and strong integration capabilities with existing systems. Invicti provides user-friendly automation, accurate vulnerability identification, and faster scanning speeds that enhance reliability in reports. Invicti is modern and efficient, appealing to users who value these attributes.

Room for Improvement: Fortify Software Security Center could improve its scanning speed and reduce false positives. Scalability for large enterprise environments is a necessary development area for Invicti. Fortify users point to a need for refining result precision, while Invicti users suggest enhancements in scaling functionalities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Fortify Software Security Center receives mixed reviews for its deployment process, finding it complex yet supported by reliable customer service. Invicti offers a straightforward deployment process and efficient customer service that quickly addresses queries, making the overall experience smoother.

Pricing and ROI: Fortify Software Security Center is considered cost-effective, with a reasonable initial setup cost offering satisfactory ROI due to its detailed analysis capabilities. Invicti, while costing more initially, provides significant ROI by reducing manual testing time and enhancing detection accuracy. Users find Invicti offers better value despite its higher pricing.

To learn more, read our detailed Fortify Software Security Center vs. Invicti Report (Updated: March 2026).

Fortify Software Security Center vs. Invicti

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 883,692 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

Fortify Software Security C...

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

19th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

4.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Invicti

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

11th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Container Security (25th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (8th), API Security (8th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Fortify Software Security Center is 1.3%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Invicti is 1.5%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Invicti	1.5%
Fortify Software Security Center	1.3%
Other	97.2%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Diego Caicedo Lescano

Chief Innovation Officer at SAGGA

Enables centralized analysis and improves governance through seamless tool integration

The main use case for Fortify Software Security Center is exceptional because we have governance and control through that console. You can centralize both static analysis and dynamic analysis, and correlate both analyses in one tool to get better results by combining those independent results from each solution. That is outstanding, and there is no tool I have seen on the market that offers these capabilities. I appreciate the interoperability with other solutions from Fortify Software Security Center. Because we are using Kiuwan, you can run Kiuwan analyses and integrate them with Fortify Software Security Center to get those results in a single console. That is a good console for centralizing things in one point. That is one of the best features of the on-premises Fortify.

Read full review

Valavan Sivgalingam

Senior Manager, Security Engineering at ESS

Dynamic testing regularly identifies web vulnerabilities and has strong false positive confirmations

It has good false positive confirmations, confirmed issues identification, and proof of exploit-related features as part of it. We use Invicti for these things in our portfolios. The solution includes Proof-Based Scanning technology. Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios. For both the API endpoints and web applications, we do regular testing on a monthly basis for all our releases. Invicti does a good job. The only concern is on the performance side, but other than that, we find it really helpful in identifying web vulnerabilities. A full scan takes more time based on your website and other factors, but for us, it takes more than two to three days. The scan performance can be improved upon. When we check with them, they discuss proof-based scanning and related aspects. However, there could be intermittent results that could help us.

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 reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."

"Fortify Analytics' AI function helps scan and provides more detailed explanations and recommendations about vulnerabilities."

"The main use case for Fortify Software Security Center is exceptional because we have governance and control through that console."

"It's very important because they want to scan their source code every day, so we provide CICD integration to our customers so they can auto build and auto test every day, get reports, and fix issues."

"I like the explanation of issues provided by Fortify Software Security Center."

"You can easily download the tool's rule packs and update them."

"Software Security Center is highly customizable and helps me test all vulnerability data against the latest conventions like OWASP Top Ten, CVE Top twenty-five, and several other legal compliances."

"This is a stable solution at the end of the day."

More Fortify Software Security Center pros

"It has very good integration with the CI/CD pipeline."

"One of the features I like about this program is the low number of false positives and the support it offers."

"Netsparker has valuable features, including the ability to scan our website, an interactive approach, and security data integration."

"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."

"Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment."

"Invicti's best feature is the ability to identify vulnerabilities and manually verify them."

"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."

"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."

More Invicti pros

Cons

"This solution is difficult to implement, and it should be made more comfortable for the end-users."

"I am not satisfied with the percentage of false positives, which is around eighteen percent."

"We are having issues with false positives that need to be resolved."

"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."

"The product's overlap feature is restrictive and requires more customization efforts, which can be expensive."

"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."

"The support for Fortify on-premises is the same as for the other products. I would say the support is not good and I would rate it a three out of ten."

"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."

"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times. This needs to be looked into."

"They need to improve their support in the documentation. Their support mechanism is missing. Their responsiveness, technical staff, and these types of things need to be improved, and comprehensive documentation is required. They should have good self-service portal enhancement"

"Reporting should be improved. The reporting options should be made better for end-users. Currently, it is possible, but it's not the best. Being able to choose what I want to see in my reports rather than being given prefixed information would make my life easier. I had to depend on the API for getting the content that I wanted. If they could fix the reporting feature to make it more comprehensive and user-friendly, it would help a lot of end-users. Everything else was good about this product."

"Right now, they are missing the static application security part, especially web application security."

"The scannings are not sufficiently updated."

"The support's response time could be faster since we are in different time zones."

"Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing."

"The license could be better. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license. It's a major hindrance that we are facing while scanning applications, and we have to be sure that the URLs are the same and not different so that we do not end up consuming another license for it. Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. The licensing is tied to the URL, and it's restricted. If you have a URL that you scanned once, like a website, you cannot retry that same license. If you are scanning the same website but in a different domain or different URL, you might end up paying for a second license. It would also be better if they provided proper support for multi-factor authentications. In the next release, I would like them to include good multi-factor authentication support."

More Invicti cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is a costly solution that could be cheaper."

"As a Fortify partner company providing technical support, I find the product expensive in our country, where local, inexpensive products are available."

"The solution is priced fair."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."

"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."

"We are using an NFR license and I do not know the exact price of the NFR license. I think 20 FQDN for three years would cost around 35,000 US Dollars."

"Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license."

"Invicti is best suited for large enterprises. I don't think small and medium-sized businesses can afford it. Maintenance costs aren't that great."

"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

883,692 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

16%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	3

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	13

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Software Security Center?

The pricing for the on-premises Fortify is expensive.

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Software Security Center?

In my opinion, there are no areas that could be improved with Fortify Software Security Center. I would say it is a good product and a mature product. However, the SAST has many improvement areas. ...

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Software Security Center?

We have installed Fortify Static Code Analysis, SAST, in Ecuador in two customers. The Fortify ScanCentral includes three components: SAST, Fortify Software Security Center, and the WebInspect.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?

The setup cost is pretty competitive. For example, if you want to talk about the SAST license, it comes to about $150 or sometimes less than $100, depending on the conversion or the number of licen...

What needs improvement with Invicti?

At this time, there is nothing that comes to mind. However, most of the products in the market are pretty much neck-to-neck competitors. Speaking about it, there are a couple of factors which they ...

What is your primary use case for Invicti?

I have worked on a couple of products, specifically in web application security. I have worked on Invicti, and with respect to PAM, I have worked with BeyondTrust. I have not worked specifically fo...

Checkmarx One vs Fortify Software Security Center

Comparisons

Compared 24% of the time

Checkmarx IaC Security / KICS vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 14% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 8% of the time

Coverity Static vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

More Fortify Software Security Center Competitors

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 10% of the time

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

Rapid7 InsightAppSec vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

Product Reports

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

February 2026

Download Fortify Software Security Center product report

Download Invicti product report

February 2026

Also Known As

Micro Focus Software Security Center, Application Security Center, HPE Application Security Center, WebInspect

Netsparker

Overview

Software Security Center enables management, development, and security teams to work together to triage, track, validate, automate, and manage software security activities.

OpenText

Invicti helps DevSecOps teams automate security tasks and save hundreds of hours each month by identifying web vulnerabilities that matter. Combining dynamic with interactive testing (DAST + IAST) and software composition analysis (SCA), Invicti scans every corner of an app to find what other tools miss with 99.98% accuracy, delivering on the promise of Zero Noise AppSec. Invicti helps discover all web assets — even ones that are lost, forgotten, or created by rogue departments. With an array of out-of-the-box integrations, DevSecOps teams can get ahead of their workloads to hit critical deadlines, improve processes, and communicate more effectively while reducing risk and hitting the ROI goals.

Sample Customers

Neosecure, Acxiom, Skandinavisk Data Center A/S, Parkeon

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank