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

OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs ReShaper comparison

OpenText and JetBrains are both solutions in the Static Code Analysis category. OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.2, while JetBrains is ranked #6. OpenText holds a 11.7% mindshare in SCAS, compared to JetBrains’s 2.5% mindshare. Additionally, 89% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of JetBrains users who would recommend it.
OpenText Static Application...
Read 19 OpenText Static Application Security Testing reviews
  • 1,641 Views
  • 118 Comparison Views
89% willing to recommend
ReShaper
Read 2 ReShaper reviews
  • 607 Views
  • 446 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

OpenText Static Application Security Testing and ReShaper are competing solutions in software development tools. ReShaper appears to have superior features, justifying its cost despite OpenText's more favorable pricing and support.

Features: OpenText Static Application Security Testing focuses on comprehensive security analysis, integration capabilities, and protection with compliance. ReShaper provides advanced code refactoring, navigation, and real-time code inspection, enhancing development efficiency.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText has a straightforward deployment model with robust support channels for easy setup. ReShaper offers a flexible deployment model with responsive support for quick troubleshooting and assistance.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Static Application Security Testing has lower setup costs, offering a compelling ROI through security-focused features. ReShaper requires a higher initial investment but delivers substantial ROI by increasing developer productivity. The efficiency gains with ReShaper may justify the cost in development-centric environments.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs. ReShaper Report (Updated: April 2025).
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs. ReShaper
April 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 857,688 peers since 2012

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 Static Application...
Ranking in Static Code Analysis
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ReShaper
Ranking in Static Code Analysis
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Static Code Analysis category, the mindshare of OpenText Static Application Security Testing is 11.7%, up from 10.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReShaper is 2.5%, down from 5.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Code Analysis
 

Featured Reviews

Aphiwat Leetavorn. - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides extensive language support and enhances secure coding practices
The deployment of Fortify Static Code Analyzer needs to be simplified. It should be easier to install, perhaps through a container-based approach where everything is combined into one image or pack of containers. This change would facilitate easier installations and ensure all necessary components are connected and ready to use.
Read full review
reviewer1465254 - PeerSpot reviewer
Detects, analyzes, and fixes any coding issues
When it's integrated with a weak server machine, the performance isn't that great. It starts up slowly and even crashes at times. If they optimized some of the modules within the ReSharper extension, it would be smoother and faster. Sometimes when the machine is a bit overloaded, it causes it to crash and you need to disable the extension and then re-enabled it. It's not really a stability issue, it probably depends on the machine, but they should consider the fact that not all people have strong machines with high hardware specifications. As long as you have a good processor it will work smoothly, but regarding minimum requirements, it needs to be revisited.
Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Fortify Static Code Analyzer tells us if there are any security leaks or not. If there are, then it's notifying us and does not allow us to pass the DevOps pipeline. If it is finds everything's perfect, as per our given guidelines, then it is allowing us to go ahead and start it, and we are able to deploy it."
"It's helped us free up staff time."
"We write software, and therefore, the most valuable aspect for us is basically the code analysis part."
"The reference provided for each issue is extremely helpful."
"My initial setup of Fortify Static Code Analyzer was good."
"We are satisfied with this solution."
"Its flexibility is most valuable. It is such a flexible tool. It can be implemented in a number of ways. It can do anything you want it to do. It can be fully automated within a DevOps pipeline. It can also be used in an ad hoc, special test case scenario and anywhere in between."
"I like the Fortify taxonomy as it provides us with a list of all of the vulnerabilities found. Fortify release updated rule packs quarterly, with accompanying documentation, that lets us know what new features are being released."
More OpenText Static Application Security Testing pros
"It comes with many features and supports almost all of the coding languages available."
"The most valuable feature of ReShaper is that it provides continuously scanning of the data in real-time. ReShaper has a really good mechanism and process, they have a decent system."
 

Cons

"Not all languages are supported in Fortify."
"I know the areas that they are trying to improve on. They've been getting feedback for several years. There are two main points. The first thing is keeping current with static code languages. I know it is difficult because code languages pop up all the time or there are new variants, but it is something that Fortify needs to put a better focus on. They need to keep current with their language support. The second thing is a philosophical issue, and I don't know if they'll ever change it. They've done a decent job of putting tools in place to mitigate things, but static code analysis is inherently noisy. If you just take a tool out of the box and run a scan, you're going to get a lot of results back, and not all of those results are interesting or important, which is different for every organization. Currently, we get four to five errors on the side of tagging, and it notifies you of every tiny inconsistency. If the tool sees something that it doesn't know, it flags, which becomes work that has to be done afterward. Clients don't typically like it. There has got to be a way of prioritizing. There are a ton of filter options within Fortify, but the problem is that you've got to go through the crazy noisy scan once before you know which filters you need to put in place to get to the interesting stuff. I keep hearing from their product team that they're working on a way to do container or docker scanning. That's a huge market mover. A lot of people are interested in that right now, and it is relevant. That is definitely something that I'd love to see in the next version or two."
"The pricing is a bit high."
"It can be tricky if you want to exclude some files from scanning. For instance, if you do not want to scan and push testing files to Fortify Software Security Center, that is tricky with some IDEs, such as IntelliJ. We found that there is an Exclude feature that is not working. We reported that to them for future fixing. It needs some work on the plugins to make them consistent across IDEs and make them easier."
"The product shows false positives for Python applications."
"The deployment of Fortify Static Code Analyzer needs to be simplified."
"Fortify's software security center needs a design refresh."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer has a bit of a learning curve, and I don't find it particularly helpful in narrowing down the vulnerabilities we should prioritize."
More OpenText Static Application Security Testing cons
"ReShaper could improve by increasing the performance of the scans. Their application is taking too much CPU. The processing is taking too many CPU resources which causes the system to slow down."
"When it's integrated with a weak server machine, the performance isn't that great. It starts up slowly and even crashes at times."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It has a couple of license models. The one that we use most frequently is called their flexible deployment. We use this one because it is flexible and based on the number of code-contributing developers in the organization. It includes almost everything in the Fortify suite for one developer price. It gives access to not just the secure code analyzer (SCA) but also to FSC, the secure code. It gives us accessibility to scan central, which is the decentralized scanning farm. It also gives us access to the software security center, which is the vulnerability management platform."
"The price of Fortify Static Code Analyzer could be reduced."
"The setup costs and pricing for Fortify may vary depending on the organization's needs and requirements."
"There is a licensing fee, and if you bring them to the company and you want them to do the installation and the implementation in the beginning, there is a separate cost. Similarly, if you want consultation or training, there is a separate cost. I see it as suitable only for enterprises. I do not see it suitable for a small business or individual use."
"The licensing is expensive and is in the 50K range."
"I rate the pricing of Fortify Static Code Analyzer as a seven out of ten since it is a bit expensive."
"Although I am not responsible for the budget, Fortify SAST is expensive."
"From our standpoint, we are significantly better off with Fortify due to the favorable pricing we secured five years ago."
"As far as I know, the licensing isn't very cheap."
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Code Analysis solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
29%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Fortify Static Code Analyzer?
Integrating the Fortify Static Code Analyzer into our software development lifecycle was straightforward. It highlights important information beyond just syntax errors. It identifies issues like pa...
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify Static Code Analyzer?
My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing has been good. We have the scan machines, and we are planning to request more from Micro Focus now. We have calls every month or every oth...
See all answers
What needs improvement with Fortify Static Code Analyzer?
I think Fortify Static Code Analyzer could be improved by updating the number of rule packs according to the latest vulnerabilities we find each year. We have updated to a version that is one less ...
See all answers
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

Black Duck vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing Logo
Black Duck vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing
Compared 34% of the time
Snyk vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing Logo
Snyk vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing
Compared 18% of the time
Veracode vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing Logo
Veracode vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing
Compared 13% of the time
GitLab vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing Logo
GitLab vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing
Compared 7% of the time
Sonatype Lifecycle vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing Logo
Sonatype Lifecycle vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing
Compared 7% of the time
More OpenText Static Application Security Testing Competitors
Whole Tomato Visual Assist vs ReShaper Logo
Whole Tomato Visual Assist vs ReShaper
Compared 100% of the time
More ReShaper Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
OpenText Static Application Security Testing
June 2025
OpenText Static Application Security Testing reportDownload OpenText Static Application Security Testing product report
Buyer's Guide
Static Code Analysis
June 2025
ReShaper reportDownload ReShaper product report
 

Also Known As

Fortify Static Code Analysis SAST
No data available
 

Overview

OpenText Static Application Security Testing empowers teams with efficient vulnerability detection and streamlined secure coding practices, offering comprehensive language support and seamless integration with development tools.

OpenText Static Application Security Testing enhances software security during development by accurately identifying vulnerabilities with minimal false positives. It integrates seamlessly with IDEs and CI/CD pipelines, making it highly efficient for early detection of security issues. Users benefit from its easy setup, clear documentation, and centralized portal for managing security findings. Despite facing challenges like high costs and complex configurations for certain languages, its role in facilitating compliance and streamlining secure coding processes is indispensable. Improvements are needed in areas such as outdated design, language support, and integration capabilities to meet evolving user expectations.

What features does OpenText Static Application Security Testing offer?
  • Seamless IDE Integration: Integrates effortlessly with development environments for real-time feedback.
  • Comprehensive Language Support: Covers a wide range of programming languages, enhancing detection accuracy.
  • Centralized Security Portal: Provides a streamlined interface for managing vulnerabilities.
What benefits and ROI should users consider?
  • Enhanced Security: Identifies vulnerabilities early, preventing potential breaches.
  • Time Efficiency: Automates processes and speeds up remediation efforts.
  • Compliance Facilitation: Assists in adhering to security standards and regulations.

Organizations across diverse sectors implement OpenText Static Application Security Testing primarily to secure applications during development phases. Its integration with tools like GitLab, Jenkins, and Azure DevOps ensures a robust security pipeline. By combining with Sonatype Nexus, secure code, and library management is achieved effectively.

OpenText

ReSharper extends Visual Studio with over 2200 on-the-fly code inspections for C#, VB.NET, ASP.NET, JavaScript, TypeScript and other technologies. For most inspections, ReSharper provides quick-fixes (light bulbs) to improve the code.

JetBrains
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs. ReShaper
April 2025
Free Report: OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs. ReShaper
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs. ReShaper and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs. ReShaper report.
See our list of best Static Code Analysis vendors.

We monitor all Static Code Analysis reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.