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

Coverity Static vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 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

Coverity Static
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity Static is 2.5%, down from 6.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.3%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security3.3%
Coverity Static2.5%
Other94.2%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Jaile Sebes - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Architect at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Resolving critical software issues demands faster implementation and better integration
We use Coverity primarily to find issues such as software bugs and memory leaks, especially in C++ and C# projects. It helps us identify deadlocks, synchronization issues, and product crashes Coverity has been instrumental in resolving product crashes by detecting various issues like deadlocks.…
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

"I encountered a bug with Coverity, and I opened a ticket. Support provided me with a workaround. So it's working at the moment, or at least it seems to be."
"Coverity provides developers with a good, best practice, coding advice, and tracks risks of poor coding quality."
"Ease of development teams to adopt."
"Provides software security, and helps to find potential security bugs or defects."
"Coverity provides excellent compliance and other features, which is a very good part."
"If you have enough budget, it is one of the best solutions right now."
"It has the lowest false positives."
"Coverity integrates with issue-tracking systems like Jira and provides email notifications, alerts, and other features."
"We have the option to test applications with or without credentials."
"HP Fortify on Demand provides an independent review of third-party applications, allowing organizations to test software before purchasing, and also allowing software vendors to demonstrate the security of their software."
"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."
"To my mind, the best features of this product are its speed and efficiency."
"The SAST feature is the most valuable."
"What is most useful is how you can have related features upgraded on the tools."
"Fortify helps us to stay updated with the newest languages and versions coming out."
"I think the most valuable feature is its ability to address the source code scanning and dynamic scanning in a known, correlated way."
 

Cons

"There is an extra step in my organization that involves uploading to servers, which adds overhead."
"Coverity's UI is the one thing that needs improvement."
"Their technical support isn't so good. That needs improvement. They don't address the problems I bring up. It's not a priority for them."
"We use GitHub and Gitflow, and Coverity does not fit with Gitflow. I have to create a screen for our branches, and it's a pain for developers. It has been difficult to integrate Coverity with our system."
"The solution could use more rules."
"Coverity could improve the ease of use. Sometimes things become difficult and you need to follow the guides from the website but the guides could be better."
"This is a pretty expensive solution. The overall value of the solution could be improved if the price was reduced."
"The reporting tool integration process is sometimes slow."
"They have very good support, but there is always room for improvement."
"The biggest deficiency is the integration with bug tracker systems."
"There's a bit of a learning curve. Our development team is struggling with following the rules and following the new processes."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the user interface by making it more user-friendly."
"The cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions."
"There are many false positives identified by the solution."
"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."
"An improvement would be the ability to get vulnerabilities flowing automatically into another system."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's pricing is comparable to other products."
"The tool's price is somewhere in the middle. It's neither cheap nor expensive. I would rate the pricing a five out of ten."
"Offers varying prices for different companies"
"The tool was fairly priced."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"The price is competitive with other solutions."
"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."
"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."
"The subscription model, on a per-scan basis, is a bit expensive. That's another reason we are not using it for all the apps."
"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."
"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"Fortify on Demand is affordable, and its licensing comes with a year of support."
"The solution is a little expensive."
"The pricing can be improved because it is complex when compared to the competition."
"It's a yearly contract, but I don't remember the dollar amount."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
27%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Outsourcing Company
5%
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 Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?
We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...
What needs improvement with Coverity?
The price is a concern, and there are a lot of false positives coming through. Support with Coverity is adequate, but they take a longer time to respond. The core support is not straightforward, an...
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

Synopsys Static Analysis
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity Static vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.