CodeSonar vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

CodeSecure and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. CodeSecure is ranked #27, while OpenText is ranked #13 with an average rating of 7.3. CodeSecure holds a 1.2% mindshare in AS, compared to OpenText’s 3.2% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of CodeSecure users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 90% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

CodeSonar

Read 7 CodeSonar reviews

2,751 Views
1,898 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Application S...

Read 64 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

6,712 Views
4,967 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

CodeSonar

OpenText Core Application S...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

OpenText Core Application Security and CodeSonar provide robust solutions in the application security space. Users often prefer CodeSonar due to its speed, detailed results, and precise log configurations, while OpenText Core is favored for its comprehensive compliance capabilities.

Features: OpenText Core Application Security offers HIPAA compliance, static and dynamic analysis, and integration capabilities that ensure minimal operational disruption and effective remediation. CodeSonar excels with its speed in analysis, detection precision, and user-friendly interface, simplifying the identification of potential vulnerabilities and errors.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Core Application Security encounters criticism for frequent false positives, a need for more visually engaging reports, and scanning times that require improvement. It also faces integration challenges with existing systems. CodeSonar requires enhancements in language support and more advanced static analysis tools, with users noting its limited application to specific coding standards.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Core Application Security supports diverse deployment through private, public, and hybrid clouds but faces challenges in providing efficient customer service and technical support. CodeSonar consistently performs well in both on-premises and cloud environments with commendable customer service but still receives some criticism for timely responses and technical assistance depth.

Pricing and ROI: Both OpenText Core Application Security and CodeSonar are viewed as expensive with pricing concerns related to license numbers and project scale. However, both are seen as worthwhile investments due to the significant security improvements and reduction in security incidents they provide.

To learn more, read our detailed CodeSonar vs. OpenText Core Application Security Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

CodeSonar vs. OpenText Core Application Security

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,873 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

CodeSonar

Ranking in Application Security Tools

27th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Code Analysis (10th)

OpenText Core Application S...

Ranking in Application Security Tools

13th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (12th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of CodeSonar is 1.2%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.2%, down from 4.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security	3.2%
CodeSonar	1.2%
Other	95.6%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Mathieu ALBRESPY

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.

Read full review

Himanshu_Tyagi

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.

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

"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."

"It has been able to scale."

"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."

"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."

"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."

"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."

"The static code analyzers are the most valuable features of this solution."

"Once we have our project created with our application pipeline connected to the test scanning, it only takes two minutes. The report explaining what needs to be modified related to security and vulnerabilities in our code is very helpful. We are able to do static and dynamic code scanning."

"It improves future security scans."

"The features that I have found most valuable include its security scan, the vulnerability finds, and the web interface to search and review the issues."

"Being able to reduce risk overall is a very valuable feature for us."

"The solution is very fast."

"The UL is easy to use compared to that of other tools, and it is highly reliable. The findings provide a lower number of false positives."

"We have the option to test applications with or without credentials."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

"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."

"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."

"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."

"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."

"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."

"It was expensive."

"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."

"It lacks of some important features that the competitors have, such as Software Composition Analysis, full dead code detection, and Agile Alliance's Best Practices and Technical Debt."

"Not fully integrated with CIT processes."

"There are many false positives identified by the solution."

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand cannot be run from a Linux Agent. When we are coding the endpoint it will not work, we have to use Windows Agent. This is something they could improve."

"It would be highly beneficial if Fortify on Demand incorporated runtime analysis, similar to how Contrast Security utilizes agents for proactive application security."

"Sometimes when we run a full scan, we have a bunch of issues in the code. We should not have any issues."

"It's still a little bit too complex for regular developers. It takes a little bit more time than usual. I know static code scan is not the main focus of the tool, but the overall time span to scan the code, and even to set up the code scanning, is a bit overwhelming for regular developers."

"It natively supports only a few languages. They can include support for more native languages. The response time from the support team can also be improved. They can maybe include video tutorials explaining the remediation process. The remediation process is sometimes not that clear. It would be helpful to have videos. Sometimes, the solution that the tool gives in the GUI is not straightforward to understand for the developer. At present, for any such issues, you have to create a ticket for the support team and request help from the support team."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is a bit costly."

"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."

"The solution's price depends on the number of licenses needed and the source code for the project."

"The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools."

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

"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."

"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."

"If I exceed one million lines of code, there might be an extra cost or a change in the pricing bracket."

"It is cost-effective."

"I'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."

"Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."

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

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

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

26%

Computer Software Company

University

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Government

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	2

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	18
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	45

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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?

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs CodeSonar

Compared 24% of the time

Coverity Static vs CodeSonar

Compared 17% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs CodeSonar

Compared 6% of the time

Veracode vs CodeSonar

Compared 6% of the time

Klocwork vs CodeSonar

Compared 4% of the time

More CodeSonar Competitors

SonarQube vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 20% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 10% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 5% of the time

Coverity Static vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 5% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

February 2026

Download CodeSonar product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Application Security

March 2026

OpenText Core Application Security report

Download OpenText Core Application Security product report

Also Known As

No data available

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand

Overview

GrammaTech enables organizations to develop software applications more efficiently, on-budget, and on-schedule by helping to eliminate harmful defects that can cause system failures, enable data breaches, and ultimately increase corporate liabilities in today’s connected world. GrammaTech is the developer of CodeSonar, the most powerful source and binary code analysis solution available today. Extraordinarily precise, CodeSonar finds, on average, 2 times more serious defects in software than other static analysis solutions. Designed for organizations with zero tolerance for defects and vulnerabilities in their applications, CodeSonar provides static analysis for applications where reliability and security are paramount - widely used by software developers in avionics, medical, automotive, industrial control, and other mission-critical applications. Some of GrammaTech's customers include Toyota, GE, Hyundai, Kawasaki, LG, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Northrop Grumman, Panasonic, and Samsung.

CodeSecure

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

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY

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

Buyer's Guide

CodeSonar vs. OpenText Core Application Security

March 2026

Free Report: CodeSonar vs. OpenText Core Application Security

Find out what your peers are saying about CodeSonar vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CodeSonar vs. OpenText Core Application Security report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.