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

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:
 

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 (8th)
Veracode
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Container Security (12th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (2nd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 11.6%, up from 10.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 14.8%, down from 27.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Veracode14.8%
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing11.6%
Other73.6%
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.
reviewer2753535 - PeerSpot reviewer
DevSecOps Engineer at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Integrates security into the development process and improves team collaboration
Veracode helps organizations develop software by reducing the risk of security vulnerabilities through developer enablement and applications focused on governance. You can utilize different levels of processes to achieve better performance or a more scalable service. Since I started working with it in 2022, I’ve found it to be cost-effective as well. Overall, Veracode is a user-friendly security tool. It includes features such as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), and Software Composition Analysis (SCA). During the development phase, we can identify vulnerabilities in the application. This process occurs in the staging environment during development. When we're ready to go to production, we conduct a final check. Essentially, this tool helps identify vulnerabilities during the code development stage, including both high-level vulnerabilities and those related to open-source software composition. We utilize specific methodologies for this purpose. Additionally, it offers a feature that allows us to set up policies based on client requirements. This means we can customize the tool to meet the specific needs of our clients, ensuring that they receive the appropriate level of security in their applications. Veracode is user-friendly as well. Compared to other tools, their scans take 15 minutes or under. If you have a large scale of libraries or data, it might take longer, but based on my personal experience, the scan usually runs within fifteen minutes. For my case study using the Veracode tool, I worked on an internal project following industry standards. We used Veracode to improve our security posture and speed up the time to market by streamlining the development process. This enhanced collaboration between developers, operations, and security teams. The automated scanning process helped identify and fix vulnerabilities earlier in the development process. We maintained compliance with regulatory requirements, avoided fines, and built customer trust by integrating security into the development process. When we conduct this scan, we receive data on a list of vulnerabilities. This information improved our communication and increased transparency, which leads to better reports about the efforts being put in. This results in a more effective and efficient collaboration process, making it user-friendly for all involved. When considering costs, if we resort to manual processes, it can be time-consuming. Therefore, we utilize automated scans to identify and fix security issues. This allows us to address vulnerabilities early in the development process, as we discussed previously. This applies both to our in-house code and third-party libraries, using Software Composition Analysis (SCA) agent-based scans. In the future, we will also implement SCA agent-based scans as a separate feature within Veracode, which can help organizations avoid the expensive and time-consuming consequences of security issues. Furthermore, we have seen an increase in compliance, helping to maintain adherence to regulatory requirements and industry standards, thereby avoiding fines and reputational damage associated with noncompliance. Additionally, by integrating security into the development process, we enhance customer trust in our organization and its products.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."
"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."
"Reporting, centralized dashboard, and bird's eye view of all vulnerabilities are the most valuable features."
"The FPA and Audit Workbench are very helpful for me, and when we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities, with very detailed examples for each vulnerability, so it is very good for users and beginners and doesn't take a lot of time to understand the tool."
"It is scalable and very easy to use."
"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities and is better at it than other products."
"When we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities. Comparison is easy in SSC."
"Veracode's cloud-based approach, coupled with the appliance that lets us use Veracode to scan internal-only web applications, has provided a seamless, always-up-to-date application security scanning solution."
"One thing that I like about Veracode is that it is quite a good tool for dynamic application testing."
"I would give Veracode a nine out of 10 because it scales incredibly well, they have very qualified people working there who are able to clearly articulate what the problems are when they are talking in a remediation or consultation call."
"I like Veracode's ease of integration and onboarding. You can quickly and easily get started with a new project or application. That's one area where Veracode shines relative to other tools we've evaluated. Other tools need more work or an engineer to do the setup. With Veracode, you can do the onboarding in a few steps quickly."
"I like its integration with GitHub. I like using it from GitHub. I can use the GitHub URL and find out the vulnerabilities."
"I can have quick results by just uploading compiled components."
"It is SaaS hosted. That makes it very convenient to use. There is no initial time needed to set up an application. Scanning is a matter of minutes. You just log in, create an application profile, associate a security configuration, and that's about it. It takes 10 minutes to start. The lack of initial lead time or initial overhead to get going is the primary advantage."
"The dynamic scanning tool is what I like the best. Compared to other tools that I've used for dynamic scanning, it's much faster and easier to use."
 

Cons

"This solution is very expensive."
"We have had a problem with authentification."
"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."
"The initial setup was complex."
"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."
"The solution is on the expensive side. It's something that clients comment on."
"My advice to others using Fortify WebInspect is not to use it, there are better solutions in the market."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"The false positive rates were quite high in our case."
"They're advertising that they have a Go scanner, but it doesn't actually function."
"For one or two particular applications, the dynamic code analysis can take too much time. Sometimes, it takes three days or more."
"I'd like to see an improved component of it work in a DevOps world, where the scanning speed does not impede progress along the AppSec pipeline."
"The scans were sometimes not accurate in version 2022. There were some false positives in the vulnerability reports. We used to get false positives, and we were responsible for checking all of the alerts and determining whether they were true positives or false positives. They might have already improved it. If they have not, they can look into how to mitigate false positives."
"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."
"If you schedule two parallel scans under the same project, one of them will be a failure."
"We get some false positives with JavaScript languages like React, TypeScript, and Angular. The problem is rooted in the build process of JavaScript, not the code we are using. This is something we spend lots of time trying to resolve. When we point to a specific library and review that on the code, we can see it is a part of the build that isn't going into production. It's only a part of the build because JavaScript has a different build process."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"This solution is very expensive."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"The price is okay."
"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."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"The price of Veracode Static Analysis is on the higher side."
"I think it's a great value. It's at a price point that a small company like mine can afford to use versus, if it was too exorbitant, I wouldn't be able to use this product. The cost of the license is small in comparison to the value it brings"
"Compared to the typical software composition analysis solutions, Veracode is not so costly, although the static analysis part of it is a little costlier."
"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."
"The pricing is fair. You get a lot out of the product."
"As compared to others, it is a costly solution. It is overpriced, and many organizations with a limited budget cannot afford it. That is why they are going for other tools, but those tools are not that effective. Veracode is better in terms of quality. If you want good service, you have to pay for it."
"If I compare the pricing with other software tools, then it is quite competitive. Whatever the price is, they have always given us a good discount."
"The pricing of the product depends upon the number of codes or the number of applications."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise46
Large Enterprise114
 

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...
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. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...
What is the biggest difference between Veracode and Checkmarx?
According to my experience of using both the tools in different organizations Veracode is a Cloud-native, managed AppSec platform with strong focus on ease of use, it is SaaS delivery, and provide...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veracode Static Analysis?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Veracode is that it is fairly moderate.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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 OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.