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

OpenText Core Application Security vs Qwiet AI comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

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

OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
14th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Qwiet AI
Ranking in Application Security Tools
20th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
18th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 4.0%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qwiet AI is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

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.
SS
Effectively in identify and fix bugs early in the development lifecycle
When it comes to ShiftLeft, the most valuable feature is definitely its ease of use and cost-effectiveness. Previously, security professionals had to spend a lot of time and effort running around, asking people to fix issues in their products, architectures, code, and even networks. With ShiftLeft, everything becomes robust and secure from within. Instead of relying on external measures like Web Application Firewalls (WAF) that are applied from the outside in, ShiftLeft takes a proactive approach. It helps prevent issues from arising in the first place, making it much easier for both security teams and developers. It's also cost-effective because you don't have to constantly go back, make changes to the code, and then push it again. Writing secure code from the start ensures that there are no vulnerabilities when it goes live. So, I would say the main features of ShiftLeft are its cost-effectiveness and ease of adaptability or use.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I use the solution in my company for security code scans."
"t's a cloud-based solution, so there was no installation involved."
"Being able to reduce risk overall is a very valuable feature for us."
"Micro Focus WebInspect and Fortify code analysis tools are fully integrated with SSC portals and can instantly register to error tracking systems, like TFS and JIRA."
"The static code analyzers are the most valuable features of this solution."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"When it comes to ShiftLeft, the most valuable feature is definitely its ease of use and cost-effectiveness."
 

Cons

"We have some stability issues, but they are minimal."
"Fortify on Demand could be improved with support in Russia."
"They have very good support, but there is always room for improvement."
"Not fully integrated with CIT processes."
"Reporting could be improved."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand can improve by having more graphs. For example, to show the improvement of the level of security."
"The thing that could be improved is reducing the cost of usage and including some of the most pricey features, such as dynamic analysis and that sort of functionality, which makes the difference between different types of tools."
"There were some regulated compliances, which were not there."
"Having support from senior management is crucial in making it mandatory for teams to collaborate with the security team throughout the development process."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."
"There are different costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand depending on the assessments you want to use. There is only a standard license needed to use the solution."
"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."
"It's a yearly contract, but I don't remember the dollar amount."
"It is cost-effective."
"The pricing can be improved because it is complex when compared to the competition."
"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."
"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
8%
Retailer
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Recreational Facilities/Services Company
14%
Legal Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 is competitive. The licenses for Fortify On Demand are generally bought in unit...
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 next day, without any code changes, it will report vulnerabilities such as passw...
What do you like most about ShiftLeft?
When it comes to ShiftLeft, the most valuable feature is definitely its ease of use and cost-effectiveness.
What needs improvement with ShiftLeft?
When it comes to areas of improvement for ShiftLeft, I believe it could benefit from greater support from senior management. It's important to have their involvement when it comes to architectural ...
What advice do you have for others considering ShiftLeft?
I would highly recommend ShiftLeft. It greatly simplifies the job for both security professionals and developers. By identifying and fixing bugs earlier in the development lifecycle, it significant...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
ShiftLeft
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: June 2025.
857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.