Acunetix vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Invicti and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Invicti is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.3, while OpenText is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.0. Invicti holds a 2.9% mindshare in AS, compared to OpenText’s 4.3% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 33 Acunetix reviews

3,124 Views
2,460 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Application S...

Read 60 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

5,912 Views
4,419 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Acunetix

OpenText Core Application S...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

Acunetix and OpenText Core Application Security are both leading products in the web application security market. OpenText Core has a slight advantage due to its strong integration with the DevOps lifecycle and detailed static code analysis.

Features: Acunetix is noted for its web-based features, fast scanning, and customizable reports with its Interactive Application Security Testing module. It includes scheduled scans and superior reporting capabilities with deep penetration testing and cross-site scripting vulnerability identification. OpenText Core Application Security offers comprehensive insights via concurrent source and dynamic code scanning, supporting broad language compatibility and detailed reports, making it a strong candidate for DevOps processes.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix users seek enhancements in the Interactive Application Security Testing module, reduction of false positives, and broader scan capabilities, including mobile environments. OpenText Core could benefit from enhanced runtime analysis, reduced false positives, and expanded integration with development tools. Users request more intuitive dashboards and quicker technical support response times.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both Acunetix and OpenText offer deployment flexibility for on-premises, cloud, and hybrid environments. Acunetix's customer service receives mixed reviews, with some users experiencing delays, while OpenText users find support generally active and responsive, although deployment complexity could be simplified.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix has experienced significant pricing increases, leading some users to question its cost-effectiveness, historically offering competitive pricing and ROI. OpenText Core operates on a subscription model, perceived as moderately priced, providing good ROI through robust features, although users desire more flexible pricing.

To learn more, read our detailed Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 858,945 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

Acunetix

Ranking in Application Security Tools

16th

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

13th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Vulnerability Management (22nd), DevSecOps (6th)

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

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.9%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 4.3%, down from 5.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil

CEO at Xcelliti

Has enabled teams to improve security testing with smooth integration and high accuracy

Acunetix has a very good ratio of fewer false positives, so users don't need to retest everything. Acunetix operates smoothly with no interruptions required, and it performs at 100% efficiency without issues in scanning anything. The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities. Acunetix integrates with every type of tool, including CI/CD tools, offering 100% integration in DevOps environments. The main benefit of Acunetix is that at the first level, users can address security issues related to penetration testing, allowing them to expose vulnerabilities and ensure all required testing is completed with very few false positives.

Read full review

Jonathan Steyn

Principal Technical Consultant at EOH

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.

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

"It generates automated reports."

"One of the features that I feel is groundbreaking, that I would like to see expanded on, is the IAS feature: The Interactive Application Security Testing module that gets loaded onto an application on a server, for more in-depth, granular findings. I think that is really neat. I haven't seen a lot of competitors doing that."

"Acunetix has an awesome crawler. It gives a referral site map of near targets and also goes really deep to find all the inputs without issues. This was valuable because it helped me find some files or directories, like web admin panels without authentication, which were hidden."

"The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities."

"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."

"I find it to be one of the most comprehensive tools, with support for manual intervention."

"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."

"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."

More Acunetix pros

"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."

"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."

"What stands out to me is the user-friendliness of each feature."

"I don’t know of any other On-Demand enterprise solution like this one where we can load the details and within a few days, receive the results of intrusion attacks, and work with HP Security Experts when needed for clarification"

"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."

"The installation was easy."

"It is valuable in improving our overall security posture by catching significant errors."

"Its ability to perform different types of scans, keep everything in one place, and track the triage process in Fortify SSC stands out."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."

"There was an issue related to updates from the internet."

"Acunetix needs to be dynamic with JavaScript code, unlike Netsparker which can scan complex agents."

"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."

"The cost can be reduced as management has noted it to be on the higher side."

"The only problem that they have is the price. It is a bit expensive, and you cannot change the number of applications for the whole year."

"Currently only supports web scanning."

"There is room for improvement in the pricing."

More Acunetix cons

"We would like a reduction in the time frame of scans. It takes us three to five days to run a scan now. We would like that reduced to under three days."

"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 password exposure."

"Temenos's (T-24) info basic is a separate programming interface, and such proprietary platforms and programming interfaces were not easily supported by the out-of-the-box versions of Fortify."

"Takes up a lot of resources which can slow things down."

"The products must provide better integration with build tools."

"Not fully integrated with CIT processes."

"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."

"In terms of communication, they can integrate a few more third-party tools. It would be great if we can have more options for microservice communication. They can also improve the securability a bit more because security is one of the biggest aspects these days when you are using the cloud. Some more security features would be really helpful."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."

"It is a bit expensive. If you need to check five applications, you have to pay almost 14,000. It is an agreement for two years at 7,000 per year for only five applications. You cannot change the applications in the license. So, you are stuck with the same license for the five applications for one full year."

"When compared with other products, the pricing is a little bit high. But it gives value for the price. It serves the purpose and is worthwhile for the price we pay."

"The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable."

"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."

"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."

"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."

"When we looked at all other vendors and what they were asking for, to provide a third of what Acunetix was capable of doing, it was an easy decision... But now that it's coming to a cost where it's line with market value, it becomes more of a competition... Acunetix is raising the cost of licensing. It's 3.5 times what we were initially quoted."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"It's a yearly contract, but I don't remember the dollar amount."

"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."

"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."

"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."

"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."

"It is cost-effective."

More OpenText Core Application Security pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

858,945 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

Most of the customers who use Acunetix are looking for security testing. The primary use case is performing penetration testing. The main use cases include vulnerability scanning, security testing,...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

Acunetix supports multi-user environments effectively. Acunetix is targeted for small to mid-size teams in a DevSecOps environment, making it the best choice for small and mid-size companies, offer...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 16% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 11% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 9% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 7% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix

Compared 6% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 17% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 13% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 12% of the time

Coverity vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 11% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 8% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

June 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Application Security

June 2025

OpenText Core Application Security report

Download OpenText Core Application Security product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand

Overview

Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner is an automated web application security testing tool that audits your web applications by checking for vulnerabilities like SQL Injection, Cross site scripting, and other exploitable vulnerabilities.

Invicti

OpenText Core Application Security offers robust features like static and dynamic scanning, real-time vulnerability tracking, and seamless integration with development platforms, designed to enhance code security and reduce operational costs.

OpenText Core Application Security is a cloud-based, on-demand service providing accurate and deep scanning capabilities with detailed reporting. Its integrations with development platforms ensure an enhanced security layer in the development lifecycle, benefiting users by lowering operational costs and facilitating efficient remediation. The platform addresses needs for intuitive interfaces, API support, and comprehensive vulnerability assessments, helping improve code security and accelerate time-to-market. Despite its strengths, challenges exist around false positives, report clarity, and language support, alongside confusing pricing and package options. Enhancements are sought in areas like CI/CD pipeline configuration, report visualization, scan times, and integration with third-party tools such as GitLab, container scanning, and software composition analysis.

What features define OpenText Core Application Security?

Static and Dynamic Scanning: Offers thorough analysis to identify vulnerabilities during development.
Real-time Vulnerability Tracking: Continuously updates and monitors potential security threats.
Seamless Development Platform Integration: Enhances security processes without disrupting workflows.
Cloud-Based Service: Provides flexible, on-demand security capabilities with accurate results.
API Support: Allows smooth integration and automation within existing systems.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Reduced Operational Costs: Optimizes resources by lowering costs associated with security management.
Efficient Remediation: Speeds up the process of identifying and resolving vulnerabilities.
Enhanced Code Security: Strengthens overall application security during the development lifecycle.
Accelerated Time-to-Market: Streamlines development stages by integrating essential security tools.

Industries like mobile applications, e-commerce, and banking leverage OpenText Core Application Security for its ability to identify vulnerabilities such as SQL injections. Integrating seamlessly with DevSecOps and security auditing processes, this tool supports developers in writing safer code, ensuring secure application deployment and enhancing software assurance.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security

June 2025

Free Report: Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security

Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

858,945 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.