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

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 (2nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Container Security (8th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (3rd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 10.6%, up from 9.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 19.4%, down from 31.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Veracode19.4%
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing10.6%
Other70.0%
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.
reviewer2703864 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Security Architecture at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Onboarding developers successfully while improving code security through IDE integration
Regarding room for improvement, we have some problems when onboarding new projects because the build process has to be done in a certain way, as Veracode analyzes the binaries and not the code by itself alone. If the process is not configured correctly, it doesn't work. That's one of the things that we are discussing with Veracode. Something positive that we've been able to do is submit formal feature requests to them, and they are working on them; they've already solved some of them. This encourages us to propose new ideas and improvements. Another improvement that we asked for this use case is to be able to configure how Veracode Fix proposes and fixes because sometimes it makes proposals using libraries that go against our architecture design made by the enterprise architecture team. For example, we want them to propose using another library, and that's something we already asked Veracode, and they are working on it. We want to specify when you see this kind of vulnerability, you can only propose these two options.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities. It's better at it than other products."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"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."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"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."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"Technical support has been good."
"It has improved the quality of code being delivered for test and its vulnerability resolutions timeline has improved."
"The source composition analysis had very good reporting."
"The most valuable feature is the efficiency of the tool in finding vulnerabilities."
"It scans for the OWASP top-10 security flaws at the dynamic level and, at the static level, it scans for all the warnings so that developers can fix the code before we go to UAT or the next phase."
"The feature I like most in Veracode is that it clearly specifies the line in the entire file where a vulnerability is found."
"Their dashboard is really good, overall. In my opinion, it's one of the best in the market, and I say that because we have used other service providers."
"The integration of static testing with our Azure DevOps CI pipeline was easy."
"Veracode is a valuable tool in our secure SDLC process."
 

Cons

"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."
"A localized version, for example, in Korean would be a big improvement to this solution."
"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."
"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."
"The scanner could be better."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
"One thing I would like to see them introduce is a cloud-based platform."
"We have had a problem with authentification."
"They should improve on the static scanning time."
"The results of agent-based software composition analysis are not connected to policy scanning. So, for me, the only thing that Veracode can improve in Software Composition Analysis is to connect it with the policy scan because, at present, it is a bit inconvenient for those in our organization who use agent-based Software Composition Analysis. In the end, they need to make a static scan with all those libraries in order to receive that report. If Veracode implemented a connection between agent-based static scan and static scanning itself, it would be great because it would lead to fewer operations in order to prepare release documentation and release reporting from Veracode. We recently had a conversation with Veracode about it."
"They need to have a plug-in, a better integration with the development environment."
"Sometimes, the scans halt or drop for some reason, and we need to get help from Veracode to fix it."
"I would love to be able to do a dynamic sandbox scan. I think that that would allow us to really get a lot more buy-in from the software development teams."
"Maybe the boards could be made easier to understand or easier to customize."
"Veracode does not support scans for .NET Blazor server applications."
"Sometimes, I get feedback from a developer saying, "They are scanning a Python code, but getting feedback around Java code." While the remediation and guidelines are there, improvement is still required, e.g., you won't get the exact guidelines, but you can get some sort of a high-level insights."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"This solution is very expensive."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"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 price is okay."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"Its complexity makes it quite expensive, but it’s all worth it, with all the engineering in the background."
"When I looked at the pricing, it was definitely a value. In terms of the service and what it's checking, the cost was very reasonable, particularly because we could have multiple code bases as part of a project."
"Regarding licensing, pay very close attention to what applications you're going to need to do dynamic scanning for, versus static. Right now, the way the licensing is set up, if you don't have any static elements for a website, you can certainly avoid some costs by doing more dynamic licenses. You need to pay very close attention to that, because if you find out later that you have static code elements - like Java scripts, etc. - that you want to have scanned statically, having the two licenses bundled together will actually save you money."
"Compared to other similar products, the licensing and pricing are definitely competitive. If you see Checkmarx as the market leader, then we are talking about Veracode being a fraction of the cost. You also have to consider your hidden costs: you need a team to maintain it, a server, and resources. From that point of view, Veracode is great because the cost is really a fraction of many competitors."
"Users in some forums mentioned that pricing for this solution can be quite high."
"The pricing is fair."
"Compared to the typical software composition analysis solutions, Veracode is not so costly, although the static analysis part of it is a little costlier."
"The pricing is a bit high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

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 Enterprise44
Large Enterprise115
 

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 do you like most about Veracode Static Analysis?
I like its integration with GitHub. I like using it from GitHub. I can use the GitHub URL and find out the vulnerabilities.
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: December 2025.
880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.