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

OpenText Core Application Security vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Veracode 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Core Application Security4.0%
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube)20.8%
Checkmarx One10.2%
Other65.0%
Application Security Tools
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing17.9%
HCL AppScan14.3%
Checkmarx One13.5%
Other54.3%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Veracode8.0%
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube)20.8%
Checkmarx One10.2%
Other61.0%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Jonathan Steyn - PeerSpot reviewer
Source code analyzer, FPR file generation, reduction of false positives and generates compliance reports, for in-depth analysis
Not challenges with the product itself. The product is very reliable. It does have a steep learning curve. But, again, one thing that Fortify or OpenText does very well is training. There are a lot of free resources and training in the community forums, free training as well as commercial training where users can train on how to use the back-end systems and the scanning engines and how to use command-line arguments because some of the procedures or some of the tools do require a bit of a learning curve. That's the only challenge I've really seen for customers because you have to learn how to use the tool effectively. But Fortify has, in fact, improved its user interface and the way users engage the dashboards and the interfaces. It is intuitive. It's easy to understand. But in some regards, the cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions. But from the point of the reliability index and how powerful the tool is, there's no challenge there. But it's just from a learning perspective; users might need a bit more skill to use the tool. The user interface isn't that tedious. It's not that difficult to understand. When I initially learned how to use the interfaces, I was able to master it within a week and was able to use it quite effectively. So training is required. All skills are needed to learn how to use the tool. I would like to see more enhancements in the dashboards. Dashboards are available. They do need some configuration and settings. But I would like to see more business intelligence capabilities within the tool. It's not particularly a cybersecurity function, but, for instance, business impact analysis or other features where you can actually use business intelligence capabilities within your security tool. That would be remarkable because not only do you have a cybersecurity tool, but you also have a tool that can give you business impact analysis and some other measurements. A bit more intelligence in terms of that from a cybersecurity perspective would be remarkable.
Navin N - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective scanning of diverse file extensions with fast reporting and issue resolution
We develop software packages for clients, and these clients are mostly in the BFSI sector. The packages need to be scanned, and we engage Fortify WebInspect for this.  Customers typically perform their own application pen tests, but in some cases, we have engagements where customers want us to scan…
Kv Rao - PeerSpot reviewer
Integrates pipelines smoothly and fortifies code against vulnerabilities
I use Veracode in multiple places including static code analysis, penetration testing, and dynamic code analysis. It is part of our pipeline and integrates well with Bitbucket and Git pipelines The ease of integration with Bitbucket pipelines and Git pipelines is vital for us. Veracode allows us…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand is the information it can provide. There is quite a lot of information. It can pinpoint right down to where the problem is, allowing you to know where to fix it. Overall the features are easy to use, you don't have to be a coder. You can be a manager, or in IT operations, et cetera, anyone can use it. It is quite a well-rounded functional solution."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"The features that I have found most valuable include its security scan, the vulnerability finds, and the web interface to search and review the issues."
"The solution saves us a lot of money. We're trying to reduce exposure and costs related to remediation."
"It is a very easy tool for developers to use in parallel while they're doing the coding. It does auto scanning as we are progressing with the CI/CD pipeline. It has got very simple and efficient API support."
"Fortify helps us to stay updated with the newest languages and versions coming out."
"The solution is very fast."
"It is valuable in improving our overall security posture by catching significant errors."
"Technical support has been good."
"It is easy to use, and its reporting is fairly simple."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"The feature that has been most influential in identifying vulnerabilities is its ability to crawl the website, understand the structure, and analyze the network packets sent and received."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"Veracode's most valuable aspect is continuous integration. It helps us integrate with other applications so that it can monitor the security process."
"Veracode has good support for microservices, and I also like the sandbox environment. For example, when introducing a new component, we can scan it in a sandbox environment. It will not impact the main environment. When our team fixes it, they. can push it to the production environment when the results are acceptable."
"Wide range of platforms and technology assessments."
"We used Veracode to improve our security posture and speed up the time to market by streamlining the development process, which enhanced collaboration between developers, operations, and security teams."
"The good thing about Veracode is that when one scans the respective application code, all the people who are part of the transformation project can update their reviews. If there are any security flaws or vulnerabilities identified, they are able to provide sufficient justification or details about the security flaws."
"One thing we like is the secret detection feature. It has helped us to discover keys stored in our settings file as a TXT document. We can address that vulnerability by using encryption. We can even scan Docker images for vulnerabilities. Static analysis is another good feature of Veracode because we can run a security scan during development to identify the vulnerabilities."
"I appreciate Veracode's SAST and SCA features, which help to find open-source vulnerabilities. I'd estimate it's about 98% accurate, though some false positives occasionally exist. Our team has been using it for a long time."
"It has provided what we were looking for in such an application, meaning static application security testing functionality. That was what we were interested in."
 

Cons

"The biggest deficiency is the integration with bug tracker systems. It might be better if the configuration screen presented for accessing the bug tracking systems could provide some flexibility."
"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."
"During development, when our developer makes changes to their code, they typically use GitHub or GitLab to track those changes. However, proper integration between Fortify on Demand and GitHub and GitLab is not there yet. Improved integration would be very valuable to us."
".NET code scanning is still dependent on building the code base before running any scan. Also, it's dependent on an IDE such as Visual Studio."
"Fortify on Demand needs to improve its pricing."
"Sometimes when we run a full scan, we have a bunch of issues in the code. We should not have any issues."
"It's still a little bit too complex for regular developers. It takes a little bit more time than usual. I know static code scan is not the main focus of the tool, but the overall time span to scan the code, and even to set up the code scanning, is a bit overwhelming for regular developers."
"There is room for improvement in the integration process."
"Fortify WebInspect's shortcoming stems from the fact that it is a very expensive product in Korea, which makes it difficult for its potential customers to introduce the product in their IT environment."
"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."
"A localized version, for example, in Korean would be a big improvement to this solution."
"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."
"I want to enhance automation. Currently, Fortify WebInspect can scan and find vulnerabilities, but users with specific skills need to interpret the results and understand how to address them."
"The initial setup was complex."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"The solution needs better integration with Microsoft's Azure Cloud or an extension of Azure DevOps. In fact, it should better integrate with any cloud provider. Right now, it's quite difficult to integrate with that solution, from the cloud perspective."
"Calypso (our application) is large and the results take up to two months. Further, we also have to package Calypso in a special manner to meet size guidelines."
"Straightforward to set up, but the configuration of the rules engine is difficult and complicated."
"Improving sorting through findings reports to filter by only what is critically relevant will help developers focus on issues."
"Veracode's SAST, DAST, and SCA are pretty good with respect to industry standards, but with regard to container security, they are in either beta or alpha testing. They need to get that particular feature up and running so that they take care of the container security part."
"Its cost and the long scanning times for large applications are the areas for improvement."
"The scanning takes a lot of time to complete."
"The scanning process for records could be faster and there is room for improvement in Veracode's performance."
"If the dynamic scan is improved, then the speed might go up. That is somehow not happening. We have raised this concern. It might also help if they could time limit scans to 24 hours instead of letting them go for three days. Then, whatever results could be shared, even if the scan is not complete, that would definitely help us."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."
"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."
"I'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."
"The pricing model it's based on how many applications you wish to scan."
"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."
"The pricing can be improved because it is complex when compared to the competition."
"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"The product's cost depends on the type of license."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"This solution is very expensive."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"The price is okay."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"Its price is almost similar to the price of AppScan. Both of them are very costly. Its price could be reduced because it can be very costly for unlimited IT scans, etc. I'm not sure, but it can go up to $40,000 to $50,000 or more than that."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"The pricing is fair."
"The licensing is fair, it is time-limited (e.g. one year) but there is a size cap for every app. If your applications are big (due third-party libraries, for example) you should discuss this beforehand and explore suitable agreements."
"Veracode's price is reasonable."
"I have not examined Veracode's pricing in detail, but from an industry perspective, I see that there is a tendency toward Veracode, which suggests competitive pricing."
"There is a fee to scale up the solution which I consider expensive."
"The pricing is reasonable compared to other tools."
"The price of Veracode Static Analysis is on the higher side."
"I think licensing needs to be changed or updated so that it works with adjustments. Pricing is expensive compared to the amount of scanning we perform."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise43
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise43
Large Enterprise112
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades.
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...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify. One day it may pass a scan with no issues, and the ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?
While I am not directly involved with licensing, I can share that our project's license for 1-9 applications costs be...
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
WebInspect works efficiently with Java-based or .NET based applications. However, it struggles with Salesforce applic...
What is your primary use case for Fortify WebInspect?
I am currently working with several tools. For Fortify, I use SCA and WebInspect. Apart from that, I use Burp Suite f...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. Son...
What do you like most about Veracode?
The SAST and DAST modules are great.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veracode?
The product’s price is a bit higher compared to other solutions. However, the tool provides good vulnerability and da...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Aaron's
Manhattan Associates, Azalea Health, Sabre, QAD, Floor & Decor, Prophecy International, SchoolCNXT, Keap, Rekner, Cox Automotive, Automation Anywhere, State of Missouri and others.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: August 2025.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.