Invicti vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Invicti and OpenText are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #15 with an average rating of 8.5, while OpenText is ranked #7 with an average rating of 7.8. Invicti holds a 2.1% mindshare in SAST, compared to OpenText’s 3.6% 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

8,384 Views
4,779 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Application S...

Read 64 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

13,745 Views
9,759 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: November 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Invicti vs. OpenText Core Application Security

November 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,769 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)

15th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Container Security (32nd), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (16th), API Security (12th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (5th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (12th)

OpenText Core Application S...

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

7th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (8th)

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Invicti is 2.1%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.6%, up from 3.5% 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	3.6%
Invicti	2.1%
Other	94.3%

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

"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."

"Scan, proxify the application, and then detailed report along with evidence and remediations to problems."

"This tool is really fast and the information that they provide on vulnerabilities is pretty good."

"Netsparker offers some pretty features: Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms, this feature expands the attack surface, Attacking feature: Actually, attacking is not a solo feature, it contains many attack engines, Hawk, and many properties, but Netsparker's attacking mechanism is very flexible, this increases the vulnerability detection rate, also, Netsparker made the Hawk for real-time interactive command-line-based exploit testing, it's very valuable for a vulnerability scanner, and a very useful API for automating the scans."

"Technical support is very professional, 10/10."

"It has improved the security of our code by scanning it and finding security defects."

"Netsparker provides a more interactive interface that is more appealing."

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

More Invicti pros

"The features I found most valuable is that it is very configurable and the installation was also very easy."

"The most valuable features are the detailed reporting and the ability to set up deep scanning of the software, both of which are in the same place."

"I don’t know of any other On-Demand enterprise solution like this one where we can load the details and within a few days, receive the results of intrusion attacks, and work with HP Security Experts when needed for clarification"

"It improves future security scans."

"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."

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand is a very easy-to-use solution."

"This product is top-notch solution and the technology is the best on the market."

"The feature that I find the most useful is being able to just see the vulnerabilities online while checking the code and then checking suggestions for fixing them."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

"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."

"Maybe supported clients can be improved. It still does not search vulnerabilities in DB2 databases, for example."

"Asset scanning could be better. Once, it couldn't scan assets, and the issue was strange. The price doesn't fit the budget of small and medium-sized businesses."

"Speed: It spends about one hour on scanning; I would like it to be less than 30 minutes."

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

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

"Improvement could be made in the area of production."

"Maybe the ability to make a good reporting format is needed."

More Invicti cons

"It could have a little bit more streamlined installation procedure. Based on the things that I've done, it could also be a bit more automated. It is kind of taking a bunch of different scanners, and SSC is just kind of managing the results. The scanning doesn't really seem to be fully integrated into the SSC platform. More automation and any kind of integration in the SSC platform would definitely be good. There could be a way to initiate scans from SSC and more functionality on the server-side to initiate desk scans if it is not already available."

"We have some stability issues, but they are minimal."

"There were some regulated compliances, which were not there, but these were the factors because of which we had to use some instances of other tools as well."

"Stability could use a little improvement as we've had some issues. It runs out of memory sometimes and uses a lot of resources."

"I would like to see improvement in CI integration and integration with GitLab or Jenkins. It needs to be more simple."

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

"This solution would be improved if the code-quality perspective were added to it, on top of the security aspect."

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand cannot be run from a Linux Agent."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is competitive in the security market."

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

"The price should be 20% lower"

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

"It is cost-effective."

"If I exceed one million lines of code, there might be an extra cost or a change in the pricing bracket."

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."

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

"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."

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

"We are still using the trial version at this point but I can already see from the trial version alone that it is a good product. For others, I would say that Fortify on Demand might look expensive at the beginning, but it is very powerful and so you shouldn't be put off by the price."

"The pricing model it's based on how many applications you wish to scan."

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

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

Construction Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

12%

Outsourcing Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Construction 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 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

What advice do you have for others considering Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

I use Fortify on Demand for monitoring up to a certain extent; it provides monitoring and helps analyze and identify issues that could propagate in the application. When used in conjunction with Ar...

See all answers

Comparisons

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

Invicti Web + API vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Invicti

Compared 4% of the time

Snyk vs Invicti

Compared 4% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

SonarQube vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 29% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 5% of the time

GitHub vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

HCL AppScan vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Invicti

October 2026

Download Invicti product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Application Security

October 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

November 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: November 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,769 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.