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

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Upwind comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
3rd
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
DevSecOps (11th)
Upwind
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
11th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (39th), Container Security (26th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (18th), API Security (11th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (25th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (15th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (30th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (18th), Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (8th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (7th), AI Security (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 11.3%, up from 11.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Upwind is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing11.3%
Upwind0.5%
Other88.2%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

Featured Reviews

AP
Cyber Security Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Enhancements in manual testing align with reporting and integration features
WebInspect works efficiently with Java-based or .NET based applications. However, it struggles with Salesforce applications, where it requires approximately 20-24 hours to crawl and audit but produces minimal findings, necessitating manual verification. The solution offers customization features for crawling and vulnerability detection. It includes various security frameworks and allows selection of specific vulnerability types to audit, such as OWASP Top 10 or JavaScript-based vulnerabilities. When working with APIs, we can select OWASP API Top 10. The tool also supports custom audit features by combining different security frameworks. For on-premises deployment, the setup is complex, particularly regarding SQL server configuration. Unlike Burp Suite or OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, which have simpler setup processes, WebInspect requires SQL server setup to function.
Mohammed Mudasser - PeerSpot reviewer
AI/ML Engineer at a educational organization with 501-1,000 employees
Runtime context has transformed how we prioritize exploitable cloud risks and protect workloads
I appreciate runtime context, which helps connect vulnerabilities and misconfigurations with actual workload behavior and network relationships, making it easier to prioritize remediation based on real exposure rather than simply working through a long list of security findings. The best features that stand out to me are contextual vulnerability prioritization, cloud workload visibility, and runtime security. I especially value how Upwind connects vulnerabilities with actual runtime behavior, which helps focus on exploitable risk rather than working through a long list of findings. It has helped us focus on actual exploitable risk instead of treating every vulnerability equally. By considering runtime activity, exposure, reachability, and sensitive data context, the team can prioritize remediation much faster and reduce unnecessary alert noise. I also value the runtime visibility and attack path context because it connects security findings with network behavior and actual workload. This makes investigations more actionable and helps the team move from simply detecting issues to understanding their real impact. The biggest positive impact has been the prioritization of cloud security risk and improved visibility. Instead of chasing every vulnerability, we can focus on issues that are actually exposed or active at runtime, which makes the security team more efficient and remediation more targeted.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."
"I'm sorry, but there is no review content provided to extract a quote from."
"The most valuable feature is the performance."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"The solution's technical support was very helpful."
"It is easy to use, and its reporting is fairly simple."
"The tool provides comprehensive vulnerability assessments which help ensure our deliverables are as free from vulnerabilities as possible. It has also streamlined our web application vulnerability assessments, assisting us in delivering secure applications to our clients."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"My advice for others looking into using Upwind is that if you are seeking a strong CNAPP with an advanced runtime and strong CDR capabilities, this is the product."
"Upwind has positively impacted my organization by reducing time to action and time to response by half."
"The combination of runtime visibility, security insights, and contextual risk prioritization makes it much easier to focus on the risks that actually matter."
"They are a great overall cloud security platform and they continue innovating and adding new features."
 

Cons

"This solution is very expensive."
"The scanner could be better."
"The first time we ran the module, it was okay, however, the next time we ran it, it almost crashed."
"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."
"Not sufficiently compatible with some of our systems."
"The solution is on the expensive side. It's something that clients comment on."
"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."
"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."
"Upwind can be improved because its UI is a bit difficult to navigate."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"This solution is very expensive."
"The price is okay."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 between $15,000 to $19,000. In comparison, Burp Suite costs approximately $500 to ...
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
WebInspect works efficiently with Java-based or .NET based applications. However, it struggles with Salesforce applications, where it requires approximately 20-24 hours to crawl and audit but produ...
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 from PortSwigger. For API testing, I use Postman with Burp Suite or WebInspect fo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Upwind?
The pricing, setup cost, and licensing process were pretty reasonable.
What needs improvement with Upwind?
I would appreciate more customizable dashboards and reporting for different teams, such as security operations, engineering, and leadership. The runtime context is excellent, but tailoring those vi...
What is your primary use case for Upwind?
My main use case for Upwind is cloud security and workload protection. I primarily use it to gain visibility into cloud assets, vulnerabilities, and runtime risks, and I mainly use it to prioritize...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
Upwind Security Upwind Platform for AWS Security Hub, Upwind Security Upwind for AWS Security Hub Extended
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aaron's
StockX, Yotpo, bill, Digital Turbine, nanit, CallRail, boomi
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs. Upwind and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.