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

Check Point CloudGuard Code Security vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

Check Point CloudGuard Code...
Ranking in DevSecOps
8th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (25th)
OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Ranking in DevSecOps
9th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the DevSecOps category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard Code Security is 3.0%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 6.4%, down from 7.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
DevSecOps Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Check Point CloudGuard Code Security3.0%
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing6.4%
Other90.6%
DevSecOps
 

Featured Reviews

Mamadou Fallou Diagne - PeerSpot reviewer
IT security and network analyst at Revenu Québec
Management team gains substantial protection while navigating ongoing configuration challenges
The most valuable features of Check Point CloudGuard Code Security include our approach to manage it via the management we have on-premises, and we also deploy the same extension management of CloudGuard to manage all the virtual systems on Azure. We effectively use artificial intelligence with Check Point CloudGuard Code Security, as we have teams that work with AI and we frequently manage our firewalls using AI along with the CloudGuard and all virtual systems.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Compared to what we used before, it's helping us to be more efficient in managing our traffic."
"Its fastest and most outstanding characteristic is ensuring a development line that will not lead to applying applications or code development."
"You can maintain a legal framework structure at all times."
"The implementation of this tool for security management and control is very simple."
"Having a cloud detection response helps to very quickly identify security threats in our environment."
"Automation has helped a lot to identify and automatically execute policies, rules, and blocks due to its machine learning."
"We have had a number of real events where developers accidentally made commits of API keys, and we were able to detect and begin response actions in minutes. We had the API key revoked in less than five minutes in such events."
"The data center security system has provided real-time analytics on performance and data configuration processes."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"There are lots of small settings and tools, like an HTTP editor, that are very useful."
"The user interface is ok and it is very simple to use."
"The transaction recorder within WebInspect is easy to use, which is valuable for our team."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities. It's better at it than other products."
 

Cons

"I am satisfied with the performance and results enhanced by this product since we deployed it."
"The enhancements are needed in the logging system and log management processes."
"The solution should improve false-positives."
"Some challenges with Check Point CloudGuard Code Security include that we noticed FortiGate is much more efficient on AWS, and our team prefers to deploy FortiGate there instead of CloudGuard due to the management challenges on the cloud."
"There needs to be better security around API integration."
"They could include web functionalities such as sandboxing."
"The ease of use could be better."
"The costs are not transparent."
"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."
"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."
"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."
"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."
"A localized version, for example, in Korean would be a big improvement to this solution."
"I want to enhance automation. Currently, Fortify WebInspect can scan and find vulnerabilities, but users with specific skills need to interpret the results and understand how to address them."
"We have had a problem with authentification."
"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is extremely affordable and high value for cost."
"The price is okay."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"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."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"This solution is very expensive."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which DevSecOps solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Security Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
Government
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Spectral?
We have had a number of real events where developers accidentally made commits of API keys, and we were able to detect and begin response actions in minutes. We had the API key revoked in less than...
What needs improvement with Spectral?
There are still areas for improvement with Check Point CloudGuard Code Security. All the features we have on the firewall on the on-premises side, we also have under CloudGuard such as IPS, Anti-Bo...
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...
 

Also Known As

Spectral
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Doddle, Bangalore International Airport, Grupo financiero ACOBO, DigitalTrack
Aaron's
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard Code Security vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.