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

CodeSonar vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

CodeSonar
Ranking in Application Security Tools
35th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Static Code Analysis (10th)
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of CodeSonar is 1.0%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.5%, down from 3.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security3.5%
CodeSonar1.0%
Other95.5%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Mathieu ALBRESPY - PeerSpot reviewer
Intigration Developer at ez-Wheel
Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand
This is the first time I've used this kind of software. It was the only one we could apply to analyze with MISRA rules. At my new company, I tried to use Klocwork. I tried to use it, just once so I cannot compare it exactly with CodeSonar. I also have a plugin for my Visual Studio and I try to make it work. It's not easy, however, I don't think that we have this kind of functionality with CodeSonar. It can do some incremental analysis. However, since this feature is also available on CodeSonar, it would be a good idea to have a plugin on Visual Studio just to have a quick analysis.
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

"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."
"CodeSonar has helped our organization because it detects dead and nonusable parts of code to create a more optimized code."
"It has helped us a lot with some issues and has helped us avoid bad code."
"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."
"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."
"I would suggest trying out automated tools along with CodeSonar on your project, and you will find out that CodeSonar reports many more defects compared to other static analysis tools, so this is a very important tool."
"The solution is very stable and we have used it for a long time with no issues."
"It has been able to scale."
"Excellent – from the PoC through setup and implementation; we received timely and knowledgeable support whenever we need it."
"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."
"t's a cloud-based solution, so there was no installation involved."
"It enforces source-code scanning, finding vulnerabilities in source code."
"The vulnerability detection and scanning are awesome features."
"While using Micro Focus Fortify on Demand we have been very happy with the results and findings."
"It has saved us a lot of time as we focus primarily on programming rather than tool operational work."
"The SAST feature is the most valuable."
 

Cons

"It was expensive."
"The MISRA guidelines were not appropriately reported and there were some flags or errors."
"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."
"It was difficult for us to apply a rule, especially to a part of the code, and not apply it to the rest of the code."
"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."
"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."
"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."
"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."
"It would be useful if they could integrate secure design reviews, security user stories in Fortify on Demand Portal, and also look for possible options to get just one view of risks for given services (Covering Application, Infrastructure, Pen. Test, etc.)."
"There is room for improvement in the integration process."
"The biggest deficiency is the integration with bug tracker systems. It might be better if the configuration screen presented for accessing the bug tracking systems could provide some flexibility."
"This solution would be improved if the code-quality perspective were added to it, on top of the security aspect."
"Fortify on Demand needs to improve its pricing."
"There were some regulated compliances, which were not there, but these were the factors because of which we had to use some instances of other tools as well."
"The UI could be better. Fortify should also suggest new packages in the product that can be upgraded. Currently, it shows that, but it's not visible enough. In future versions, I would like more insights about the types of vulnerabilities and the pages associated with the exact CVE."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is a bit costly."
"The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools."
"The solution's price depends on the number of licenses needed and the source code for the project."
"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."
"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."
"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."
"Fortify on Demand is affordable, and its licensing comes with a year of support."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."
"The pricing model it's based on how many applications you wish to scan."
"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."
"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
22%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 ...
What advice do you have for others considering Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
I use Fortify on Demand for monitoring up to a certain extent; it provides monitoring and helps analyze and identify issues that could propagate in the application. When used in conjunction with Ar...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about CodeSonar vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.