No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Ixia BreakingPoint vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

Ixia BreakingPoint
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
33rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Ixia BreakingPoint is 0.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.3%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security3.3%
Ixia BreakingPoint0.7%
Other96.0%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Sai Prasad - PeerSpot reviewer
Staff QA Engineer at Virsec
Works better for testing traffic, mix profile, and enrollment scenarios than other solutions
Once, when I raised a ticket regarding a hardware or software issue, the solution's support team visited our company to discuss and find out ways to solve the problem. Sometimes, they asked us to send several photos from the back and front end to identify the issue. It was time-consuming as we were occupied with some other testing simultaneously. Instead, it would have been great if they could have visited our company and rectified the problem.
Himanshu_Tyagi - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use."
"I like that we can test cloud applications."
"The most valuable feature of Ixia BreakingPoint is the ransomware and malware database for simulated attacks."
"BPS VE evaluation was used for testing LTE Network elements with a focus on user plane testing BPS VE along with its UI and new concepts to reduce the complexity of manual testing to a large extent."
"It is a scalable solution."
"We use Ixia BreakingPoint for Layer 7 traffic generation. That's what we like."
"There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades."
"The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible."
"The solution scans our code and provides us with a dashboard of all the vulnerabilities and the criticality of the vulnerabilities, and it is very useful that they provide right then and there all the information about the vulnerability, including possible fixes, as well as some additional documentation and links to the authoritative sources of why this is an issue and what's the correct way to deal with it."
"The source code analyzer is the most effective for identifying security vulnerabilities."
"The solution is very fast."
"Fortify on Demand can be scaled very easily."
"When choosing a software security product, we expect the product not only has the ability to find exploits, but also has educational and instructional capabilities related to exploits."
"What stands out to me is the user-friendliness of each feature."
"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."
"While using Micro Focus Fortify on Demand we have been very happy with the results and findings."
 

Cons

"The quality of the traffic generation could be improved with Ixia BreakingPoint, i.e. to get closer to being accurate in what a real user will do."
"The flash GUI has room for improvement."
"The price could be better."
"They should improve UI mode packages for the users."
"I would appreciate some preconfigured network neighborhoods, which are predefined settings for testing networks."
"The production traffic simulations are not realistic enough for some types of DDoS attacks."
"Currently BPS VE's REST API was just developed (some specific functionalities are implemented) and can be improved for better control over the tool using scripts, which help in test automation."
"The SSL simulation is realistic but some kinds of tests work imperfectly."
"Technical support is 6/10. I find the Internet to be more helpful at times than their own tech support in finding answers."
"If you have a continuous integration in place, for example, and you want it to run along with your build and you want it to be fast, you're not going to get it. It adds to your development time."
"The UI could be better. Fortify should also suggest new packages in the product that can be upgraded. Currently, it shows that, but it's not visible enough. In future versions, I would like more insights about the types of vulnerabilities and the pages associated with the exact CVE."
"Reporting could be improved. It would nice to export to an Excel sheet or another spreadsheet."
"If you're a beginner, give Fortify a go. If you're a professional, it might be worth looking at other tools because Fortify does have limitations when it comes to scalability and executable codes."
"Stability could use a little improvement as we've had some issues. It runs out of memory sometimes and uses a lot of resources."
"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."
"I know OpenText is developing Aviator, similar to ChatGPT, with LLM inside the OpenText Core Application Security environment. However, I understand they do not have it for the on-premises environment."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"or us, the pricing is somewhere around $12,000 a year. I'm unsure as to what new licenses now cost."
"The solution is expensive."
"We have a one year subscription license for $25,000 US Dollars."
"The price of the solution is expensive."
"The price is high. We pay for the license monthly."
"There is no differentiation in licenses for Breaking Point. For one license, you will get all the features. There is no complexity in that."
"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."
"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."
"It is not more expensive than other solutions, but the pricing is competitive."
"The pricing model it's based on how many applications you wish to scan."
"Fortify on Demand is affordable, and its licensing comes with a year of support."
"The subscription model, on a per-scan basis, is a bit expensive. That's another reason we are not using it for all the apps."
"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."
"The product's cost depends on the type of license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

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

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Corsa Technology
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Ixia BreakingPoint vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.