Invicti vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Invicti and OpenText are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.4, while OpenText is ranked #9 with an average rating of 7.8. Invicti holds a 2.0% mindshare in SAST, compared to OpenText’s 3.2% mindshare. Additionally, 96% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 90% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Invicti

Read 31 Invicti reviews

6,949 Views
4,100 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Application S...

Read 64 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

10,911 Views
7,747 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

Invicti

OpenText Core Application S...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

OpenText Core Application Security and Invicti are key players in the application security solutions category. OpenText Core may have the upper hand with its comprehensive dashboards and integration within DevOps lifecycles, while Invicti excels in proof-based scanning, reducing false positives.

Features: OpenText Core Application Security offers static and dynamic scanning, vulnerability management, and seamless DevOps pipeline integration. Users benefit from comprehensive dashboards and remediation guidance. Invicti is known for robust web application security assessments, proof-based scanning, and effective vulnerability detection. Its interactive interface and capabilities to reduce false positives are significant advantages.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Core Application Security struggles with complex code scenarios and faces issues with false positives. It also has limitations in programming language support, needing AI-enhancements to improve accuracy. Invicti requires faster scan speeds and better reporting formats. Improvements are needed in proof concepts and verification levels.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Core Application Security provides multiple deployment options including on-premises, public, and hybrid cloud environments but could enhance support responsiveness. Invicti supports hybrid environments and is praised for its technical support, though it can be slow during critical events. Deployment flexibility is key for both, but customer service could see improvements.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Core Application Security is valued for comprehensive features but comes at a higher cost, presenting challenges for cost-effective broad applications. Invicti, with costlier enterprise solutions, offers flexible licensing and potential savings through effective vulnerability management, although pricing can affect accessibility for smaller companies.

To learn more, read our detailed Invicti vs. OpenText Core Application Security Report (Updated: August 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Invicti vs. OpenText Core Application Security

August 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 908,834 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

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) (10th), API Security (10th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (9th)

OpenText Core Application S...

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

9th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Invicti is 2.0%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.2%, down from 4.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security	3.2%
Invicti	2.0%
Other	94.8%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

PrashantUppuluri

Solution Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

Automated scanning has strengthened web application security and supports hybrid protection

A good scanning engine is what I appreciate about Invicti. When you want to find out the vulnerabilities within your web applications, Invicti has done a thorough job with respect to filtering out the vulnerabilities and identifying the risk factors with respect to the security modules within the solution. Invicti does have a segment of the solution which works on the automated scanning engine. As long as the license is active, the scanners that work within the solution are pretty effective. With respect to SAST and DAST, being a real-time scanning engine is one of the portfolios and one of the selling factors of the solution. Invicti is known to be a solution that works within the hybrid environment, be it cloud, on-premises, or a mix and match across multiple marketplaces. It does a thorough job. Most importantly, Invicti is a very good SAST and DAST solution that is very competitive in the market with respect to competitors. Invicti is a part of the Magic Quadrant with respect to Gartner's Magic Quadrant and has made a very good customer database and pipeline within the marketplace locally. With respect to security impacts in terms of support, Invicti is pretty much supportive. With respect to use cases or the POCs I have run on the solution, we have identified a couple of vulnerabilities and Invicti was able to trace them, detect, and quarantine the attacks.

Read full review

Himanshu_Tyagi

Lead Cybersecurity at TBO

Supports secure development pipelines and improves issue detection but limits internal visibility and needs broader dashboard integration

If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. That was the only reason we migrated from Fortify on Demand to another solution. Fortify has another tool which is Fortify WebInspect. On Demand is the outsourcing solution, and WebInspect you can use with your in-house team, which is basically the product developed by the Fortify team. For automated scanning, Fortify helps a lot. Regarding the visibility for the internal team, everyone is moving toward the DevSecOps side, and Fortify team has made good progress that you can integrate into your CICD pipeline. One thing I would highlight is if Fortify can focus more on the centralized dashboard of the tools because nowadays, tools such as SentinelOne also exist for identifying security issues, but they have a centralized dashboard that merges their cloud solution and application security side solution together. If you have one tool that works for different solutions, it helps a lot. They are doing good, but they should invest more on the AI side as well because AI security is evolving these days. On the cloud side, they have already made good progress, but I believe they should explore the new area related to AI security as well.

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

"We use simultaneous products, but I found this to be the best of the lot."

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

"The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan."

"Invicti has done a commendable job with respect to ROI, and with respect to being a cost-effective solution and one of the market leaders as an effective solution for SAST and DAST, Invicti has performed very well."

"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly and it's a very user-friendly product."

"I am impressed with Invictus’ proof-based scanning. The solution has reduced the incidence of false positive vulnerabilities. It has helped us reduce our time and focus on vulnerabilities."

"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."

"I would tell potential users that it's really one of the best products in the market for web application security or Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)."

More Invicti pros

"HP Fortify on Demand provides an independent review of third-party applications, allowing organizations to test software before purchasing, and also allowing software vendors to demonstrate the security of their software."

"Fortify on Demand has helped us more easily ensure the security of our client's application, which works with sensitive information such as payments and taxation."

"Fortify helps us to stay updated with the newest languages and versions coming out."

"I would definitely recommend Micro Focus Fortify any day for clients who are looking for a good security solution."

"We identified a lot of security vulnerability much earlier in the development and could fix this well before the product was rolled out to a huge number of clients."

"Once we have our project created with our application pipeline connected to the test scanning, it only takes two minutes. The report explaining what needs to be modified related to security and vulnerabilities in our code is very helpful. We are able to do static and dynamic code scanning."

"There is not only one specific feature that we find valuable. The idea is to integrate the solution in DevSecOps which we were able to do."

"HP Fortify is perfect for any company that creates their own applications or uses vendor-developed ones; it’s great for QA and development phases."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

"The solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved."

"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."

"Reporting should be improved. The reporting options should be made better for end-users."

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

"Perhaps the custom attack preparation screen might be improved."

"They don't really provide the proof of concept up to the level that we need in our organization."

"The licensing model should be improved to be more cost-effective. There are URL restrictions that consume our license. Compared to other DAST solutions and task tools like WebInspect and Burp Enterprise, Invicti is very expensive. The solution’s scanning time is also very long compared to other DAST tools. It might be due to proof-based scanning."

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

More Invicti cons

"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."

"There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify."

"The solution has some issues with latency. Sometimes it takes a while to respond. This issue should be addressed."

"I would like the solution to add AI support."

"The reporting capabilities need improvement, as there are some features that we would like to have but are not available at the moment."

"Integration to CI/CD pipelines could be improved. The reporting format could be more user friendly so that it is easy to read."

"However, I am a customer, so I always think the pricing is something that could be improved."

"Temenos's (T-24) info basic is a separate programming interface, and such proprietary platforms and programming interfaces were not easily supported by the out-of-the-box versions of Fortify."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"It is competitive in the security market."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

"It is not more expensive than other solutions, but the pricing is competitive."

"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."

"It's a yearly contract, but I don't remember the dollar amount."

"I'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."

"Despite being on the higher end in terms of cost, the biggest value lies in its abilities, including robust features, seamless integration, and high-quality findings."

"It is cost-effective."

"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."

"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."

More OpenText Core Application Security 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

908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

Construction Company

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Construction Company

Outsourcing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	18
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	46

Questions from the Community

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...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

In comparison with other tools, they're competitive. It is not more expensive than other solutions, but their pricing is competitive. The licenses for Fortify On Demand are generally bought in unit...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

Areas for improvement should be contextualized post the OpenText acquisition, but back when I was working with Micro Focus, they focused heavily on enterprise-centric solutions. Now, after the acqu...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

For OpenText Core Application Security, I currently support a couple of my clients who are using Fortify on Demand for their web application, CRM, and sales platform. Many good features of Fortify ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 8% of the time

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

Snyk vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Invicti

Compared 4% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

SonarQube vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 26% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 6% of the time

GitHub vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 5% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Invicti

August 2026

Download Invicti product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Application Security

July 2026

OpenText Core Application Security report

Download OpenText Core Application Security product report

Also Known As

Netsparker

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand

Overview

Invicti offers advanced web application security testing focused on identifying vulnerabilities like SQL injection and cross-site scripting. Its Proof-Based Scanning minimizes false positives and integrates seamlessly with CI/CD pipelines, making it an effective tool for enterprise environments.

Invicti provides comprehensive scanning capabilities that include detecting and verifying critical vulnerabilities and security data consolidation. Its scalable scanning engine and robust API support allow for flexible testing across diverse environments, including web and API testing. Despite some drawbacks like limited single sign-on integration and slow scanning speeds for large applications, Invicti remains a popular choice for automating security assessments, ensuring compliance with standards like OWASP Top 10, PCI DSS, and GDPR.

What are the key features of Invicti?

Comprehensive Vulnerability Scanning: Detects vulnerabilities like SQL injection and XSS.
Proof-Based Scanning: Confirms exploitability and reduces false positives.
CI/CD Integration: Seamlessly integrates with development pipelines.
Security Data Consolidation: Centralizes data for better insights.
User-Friendly Interface: Facilitates easy analysis and reporting.
Scalable Scanning Engine: Supports testing in enterprise environments.
Robust API Support: Enhances flexibility in testing.

What benefits and ROI should users look for in reviews?

Proactive Security: Actively identifies and verifies vulnerabilities to prevent breaches.
Regulatory Compliance: Helps maintain compliance with standards like PCI DSS and GDPR.
Efficient Vulnerability Management: Aids in prioritizing remediation efforts.
Integration Capabilities: Streamlines processes with CI/CD pipeline compatibility.

In industries like finance, healthcare, and e-commerce, Invicti is implemented to bolster security through automated vulnerability assessments. Its ability to provide insightful reports and remediation suggestions assists companies in efficiently managing security risks and achieving compliance with critical regulatory standards.

Invicti

OpenText Core Application Security offers robust features like static and dynamic scanning, real-time vulnerability tracking, and seamless integration with development platforms, designed to enhance code security and reduce operational costs.

OpenText Core Application Security is a cloud-based, on-demand service providing accurate and deep scanning capabilities with detailed reporting. Its integrations with development platforms ensure an enhanced security layer in the development lifecycle, benefiting users by lowering operational costs and facilitating efficient remediation. The platform addresses needs for intuitive interfaces, API support, and comprehensive vulnerability assessments, helping improve code security and accelerate time-to-market. Despite its strengths, challenges exist around false positives, report clarity, and language support, alongside confusing pricing and package options. Enhancements are sought in areas like CI/CD pipeline configuration, report visualization, scan times, and integration with third-party tools such as GitLab, container scanning, and software composition analysis.

What features define OpenText Core Application Security?

Static and Dynamic Scanning: Offers thorough analysis to identify vulnerabilities during development.
Real-time Vulnerability Tracking: Continuously updates and monitors potential security threats.
Seamless Development Platform Integration: Enhances security processes without disrupting workflows.
Cloud-Based Service: Provides flexible, on-demand security capabilities with accurate results.
API Support: Allows smooth integration and automation within existing systems.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Reduced Operational Costs: Optimizes resources by lowering costs associated with security management.
Efficient Remediation: Speeds up the process of identifying and resolving vulnerabilities.
Enhanced Code Security: Strengthens overall application security during the development lifecycle.
Accelerated Time-to-Market: Streamlines development stages by integrating essential security tools.

Industries like mobile applications, e-commerce, and banking leverage OpenText Core Application Security for its ability to identify vulnerabilities such as SQL injections. Integrating seamlessly with DevSecOps and security auditing processes, this tool supports developers in writing safer code, ensuring secure application deployment and enhancing software assurance.

OpenText

Sample Customers

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

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.

Buyer's Guide

Invicti vs. OpenText Core Application Security

August 2026

Free Report: Invicti vs. OpenText Core Application Security

Find out what your peers are saying about Invicti vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Invicti vs. OpenText Core Application Security report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.