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

Cequence Security vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

Cequence Security
Ranking in Application Security Tools
24th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Bot Management (7th), API Security (6th)
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Cequence Security is 0.6%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.3%, down from 4.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security3.3%
Cequence Security0.6%
Other96.1%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Paulo Estevao - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Sales Engineer at e-Safer
Comprehensive API discovery has enabled us to block bots in real time and improve compliance reporting
Cequence Security can continue evaluating and evolving the machine learning and the AI that they have because attackers are using more AI, making it faster to learn how to attack APIs and business logic. When Cequence Security invests in their AI, they will provide quicker protection that our customers need, and the way that attackers think can be translated into security measures on Cequence Security workflows and baseline. They need to improve faster in the AI environment because the possibility of attackers is growing, which is something that must be improved continuously as we need quicker releases since the market demands it. Regarding accuracy and reliability, the AI has a baselining that allows it to learn from attacks, but it needs to improve more because in the Brazilian market, we have a creative environment for attackers who are familiar with the business logic of our customers, making it easier for them to imitate legitimate users during attacks. Thus, they need to enhance behavior analysis to differentiate themselves from all other products on the market. Latency can be a significant issue in bigger environments, especially since the architecture requires uninterrupted traffic to ensure customers can finish transactions. The defender component managing inline traffic holds all traffic and has mechanisms to control latency, allowing fallback during high-risk situations, but the sensor used for mirroring traffic is outdated and does not work properly.
Himanshu_Tyagi - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
Supports secure development pipelines and improves issue detection but limits internal visibility and needs broader dashboard integration
If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. That was the only reason we migrated from Fortify on Demand to another solution. Fortify has another tool which is Fortify WebInspect. On Demand is the outsourcing solution, and WebInspect you can use with your in-house team, which is basically the product developed by the Fortify team. For automated scanning, Fortify helps a lot. Regarding the visibility for the internal team, everyone is moving toward the DevSecOps side, and Fortify team has made good progress that you can integrate into your CICD pipeline. One thing I would highlight is if Fortify can focus more on the centralized dashboard of the tools because nowadays, tools such as SentinelOne also exist for identifying security issues, but they have a centralized dashboard that merges their cloud solution and application security side solution together. If you have one tool that works for different solutions, it helps a lot. They are doing good, but they should invest more on the AI side as well because AI security is evolving these days. On the cloud side, they have already made good progress, but I believe they should explore the new area related to AI security as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cequence Security has positively impacted our organization by giving us a lot of visibility from the market point of view since it competes with much bigger companies such as Akamai, Salt, and Imperva."
"It uses machine learning algorithms to detect attacks and manage API inventory."
"Fortify supports most languages. Other tools are limited to Java and other typical languages. IBM's solutions aren't flexible enough to support any language. Fortify also integrates with lots of tools because it has API support."
"Micro Focus WebInspect and Fortify code analysis tools are fully integrated with SSC portals and can instantly register to error tracking systems, like TFS and JIRA."
"Almost all the features are good. This solution has simplified designing and architecting for our solutions. We were early adopters of microservices. Their documentation is good. You don't need to put in much effort in setting it up and learning stuff from scratch and start using it. The learning curve is not too much."
"Almost all the features are good. This solution has simplified designing and architecting for our solutions."
"Fortify on Demand is affordable, and its licensing comes with a year of support."
"Excellent – from the PoC through setup and implementation; we received timely and knowledgeable support whenever we need it."
"The SAST feature is the most valuable."
"Each bank may have its own core banking applications with proprietary support for different programming languages. This makes Fortify particularly relevant and advantageous in those cases."
 

Cons

"Latency can be a significant issue in bigger environments, especially since the architecture requires uninterrupted traffic to ensure customers can finish transactions."
"It is expensive."
"This solution would be improved if the code-quality perspective were added to it, on top of the security aspect."
"With Rapid7 I utilized its reporting capabilities to deliver Client Reports within just a few minutes of checking the data. I believe that HP’s FoD Clients could sell more services to clients if HP put more effort into delivering visually pleasing reporting capabilities."
"If you have a continuous integration in place, for example, and you want it to run along with your build and you want it to be fast, you're not going to get it. It adds to your development time."
"I would say OpenText Core Application Security is not very user-friendly in terms of price; it is quite high."
"There are many false positives identified by the solution."
"However, I am a customer, so I always think the pricing is something that could be improved."
"The solution has some issues with latency. Sometimes it takes a while to respond. This issue should be addressed."
"We typically do our bulk uploads of our scans with some automation at the end of the development cycle but the scanning can take a lot of time. If you were doing all of it at regular intervals it would still consume a lot of time. This could procedure could improve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It's a yearly contract, but I don't remember the dollar amount."
"Despite being on the higher end in terms of cost, the biggest value lies in its abilities, including robust features, seamless integration, and high-quality findings."
"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."
"It is not more expensive than other solutions, but the pricing is competitive."
"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."
"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."
"The solution is a little expensive."
"If I exceed one million lines of code, there might be an extra cost or a change in the pricing bracket."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cequence Security?
Cequence Security can continue evaluating and evolving the machine learning and the AI that they have because attackers are using more AI, making it faster to learn how to attack APIs and business ...
What is your primary use case for Cequence Security?
My main use case for Cequence Security is that my company is an integrator for Cequence Security, so we deliver this product to our customers in financial, banking, healthcare, and other sectors. A...
What advice do you have for others considering Cequence Security?
I can give Cequence Security a rating of 10 because this product genuinely makes a difference for our customers, and they do not need to lock in to Akamai does, which is significant for our custome...
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...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
Areas for improvement should be contextualized post the OpenText acquisition, but back when I was working with Micro Focus, they focused heavily on enterprise-centric solutions. Now, after the acqu...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
For OpenText Core Application Security, I currently support a couple of my clients who are using Fortify on Demand for their web application, CRM, and sales platform. Many good features of Fortify ...
 

Also Known As

Cequence ASP, Cequence Unified API Protection Platform
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

T-Mobile, Lbrands, Ulta Beauty
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cequence Security vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.