Fortify Application Defender vs SonarQube comparison

OpenText and SonarSource Sàrl are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. OpenText is ranked #24 with an average rating of 8.0, while SonarSource Sàrl is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.2. OpenText holds a 1.2% mindshare in AS, compared to SonarSource Sàrl’s 16.9% mindshare. Additionally, 81% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of SonarSource Sàrl users who would recommend it.

Fortify Application Defender

Read 11 Fortify Application Defender reviews

1,527 Views
1,267 Comparison Views

81% willing to recommend

SonarQube

Read 134 SonarQube reviews

38,374 Views
26,862 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Fortify Application Defender

SonarQube

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

SonarQube and Fortify Application Defender are key players in application security. SonarQube excels in language support, code analysis, and integration flexibility, while Fortify Application Defender harnesses advanced machine learning for vulnerability detection, offering robust real-time protection.

Features: SonarQube offers extensive language support, customized quality profiles, and comprehensive integration capabilities, enhancing code visualization and analysis. Fortify Application Defender prioritizes machine learning-driven real-time security, with automatic notifications to preemptively tackle vulnerabilities.

Room for Improvement: SonarQube should improve its security features, streamline integrations, and expand language support. It also faces challenges in multi-language project setups. Fortify Application Defender could enhance language support and focus on reducing false positives for precise threat assessment.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: SonarQube offers flexible deployment options, including on-premises and cloud, but relies on its community for support. Fortify Application Defender has similar deployment flexibility but needs to expand platform support and improve technical assistance responsiveness.

Pricing and ROI: SonarQube stands out with a community edition and affordable enterprise pricing, providing strong ROI with its plugins. Fortify Application Defender, while effective for advanced security, is costlier, potentially limiting smaller business adoption.

To learn more, read our detailed Fortify Application Defender vs. SonarQube Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Fortify Application Defender vs. SonarQube

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 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

Fortify Application Defender

Ranking in Application Security Tools

24th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

SonarQube

Ranking in Application Security Tools

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

134

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (1st), Software Development Analytics (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Fortify Application Defender is 1.2%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube is 16.9%, down from 26.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
SonarQube	16.9%
Fortify Application Defender	1.2%
Other	81.9%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

VinothSivam

CTO at Abcl

Useful for fast code review in devOps pipelines

I rate the tool's scalability a seven out of ten. However, I'm concerned about how it handles an increasing number of lines of code. As the complexity grows, so does the time it takes for the tool to review everything. I want more clarity on how Fortify Application Defender handles multiple threats. We have numerous endpoints, but the tool runs in our pipeline, meaning it operates in the cloud. All our code is configured there, and the tool runs integration testing, unit testing, user testing, and final production code tests. It's a day-to-day experience. It's utilized almost every day as part of our pipeline runs. Each team responsible for integration testing, human testing, user access testing, and preproduction testing runs it whenever they take a build.

Read full review

KarthikHarpanhalli

Sr Software Engineering Supervisor at Mozarc Medical

Gains control over rule customization and achieves reliable vulnerability assessment

The deployment process took me about 2 or 3 hours to deploy SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube), although I do not remember exactly since it was done about 2 years back. Currently, about 10 of my developers are using SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) in my company. I do not have plans to increase the usage of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) in the future as there will not be any requirement to increase. I am a senior software engineer and supervisor at Mozark Medical. My corporate email address is karthik.k.a.r.t.h.i.k.h.a.r.p.a.n.h.a.l.l.i@mozarkmedical.com. Overall, I would rate SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) as a 9 out of 10.

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

"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."

"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."

"The product saves us cost and time."

"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."

"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."

"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."

"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."

"We are able to provide out customers with a secure application after development. They are no longer left wondering if they are vulnerable to different threats within the market following deployment."

More Fortify Application Defender pros

"The most valuable features are the segregation containment and the suspension of product services."

"The most valuable features of SonarCloud are the ability to discover vulnerabilities, security weak points, security hotspots, and all the feedback that comes into the feature branch. You can deploy the code with the security, you can eliminate the problem at the developer level rather than identifying the problem in the productions."

"SonarQube's unit test coverage and exhaustive information at the module, project, and overall code repo levels are quite good."

"I follow Quality Gate's graduation model within organization, and it is extremely helpful for me to benchmark products."

"When we push our code to the repo, while in continuous integration, it will run a few tests and based on the vulnerability data set it has, it can track the vulnerabilities, indicate the code line where the issue exists, and show how much code is covered by all the unit tests, integration tests, and those sorts of things."

"The freemium version of SonarQube Server offers excellent value, especially compared to the high costs of Snyk."

"We've configured it to run on each commit, providing feedback on our software quality. ]"

"The ability to tailor metrics tracking with SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) has been beneficial to my team and stakeholders as we are able to get portfolio reports and project-wise reports, though there are areas for improvement."

More SonarQube pros

Cons

"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."

"The false positive rate should be lower."

"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."

"The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and security checks. Many independent and open-source tools are available, from Apache to various libraries. Using multiple DevOps pipeline tools can slow the turnaround time."

"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."

"The solution is quite expensive."

"The licensing can be a little complex."

"The solution could improve the time it takes to scan. When comparing it to SonarQube it does it in minutes while in Fortify Application Defender it can take hours."

More Fortify Application Defender cons

"The scanning part could be improved in SonarQube. We have used Coverity for scanning, and we have the critical issues reported by Coverity. When we used SonarQube for scanning and looked at the results, it seems that some of them have incorrect input. This part can be improved for C and C++ languages."

"There are limitations to the free version that limit development options as far as languages."

"Their dashboarding is very limited. They can improve their dashboards for multiple areas, such as security review, maintainability, etc. They have all this information, so they should publish all this information on the dashboard so that the users can view the summary and then analyze it further. This is something that I would like to see in the next version."

"The solution could improve by providing more advanced technologies."

"Code security scanning could be improved."

"SonarQube could improve by adding automatic creation of tasks after scanning and more support for the Czech language."

"Although it has Sonar built into it, it is still lacking. Customization features of identifying a particular attack still need to be worked on. To give you an example: if we want to scan and do a false positive analysis, those types of features are missing. If we want to rescan something from a particular point that is a feature that is also missing. It’s in our queue. That will hopefully save a lot of time."

"The product's pricing could be lower."

More SonarQube cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Fortify Application Defender is very expensive."

"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten. It comes as an annual cloud subscription. The tool's pricing is around 50 lakhs."

"The base licensing costs for the SaaS platform is about $900 USD per application, per year."

"The licensing is very complex, it's project based and can range from $10,000 to $200,000+ depending on the project type and size."

"The price of this solution could be less expensive."

"The product’s price is much higher than other tools."

"There are many different packages with different pricing options available. We are able to try what we have and if we need extra features we can upgrade the license."

"We use the solution free of cost."

"My guess is that we have a yearly subscription. We use it quite extensively, so a monthly license wouldn't make sense. Yearly subscriptions are usually cheaper. In addition to the standard licensing fee, there is just the cost of running the hardware where it is hosted."

"The price of the solution could be reduced."

"People can try the free licenses and later can seek buying plugins/support, etc. once they started liking it."

"We are using the free, unlicensed version."

"This product is open source and very convenient."

"SonarQube price is a little bit higher than Kiuwan's. Kiuwan also gives a little bit of flexibility in terms of pricing."

More SonarQube 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

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Government

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	8

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	41
Midsize Enterprise	24
Large Enterprise	79

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Fortify Application Defender?

I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Fortify Application Defender?

The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Fortify Application Defender?

We use the solution for fast code review. It is integrated into our DevOps pipeline.

See all answers

Is SonarQube the best tool for static analysis?

I am not very familiar with SonarQube and their solutions, so I can not answer. But if you are asking me about which tools that are the best for for Static Code Analysis, I suggest you have a look...

See all answers

Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?

SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Checkmarx One vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 14% of the time

Coverity Static vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 5% of the time

Klocwork vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 5% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 5% of the time

Veracode vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 5% of the time

More Fortify Application Defender Competitors

Checkmarx One vs SonarQube

Compared 28% of the time

Snyk vs SonarQube

Compared 9% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs SonarQube

Compared 6% of the time

Coverity Static vs SonarQube

Compared 5% of the time

Semgrep vs SonarQube

Compared 4% of the time

More SonarQube Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

February 2026

Download Fortify Application Defender product report

Buyer's Guide

SonarQube

January 2026

Download SonarQube product report

Also Known As

HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender

Sonar, SonarQube Cloud

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

OpenText

SonarSource Sàrl

Overview

Micro Focus Security Fortify Application Defender is a runtime application self-protection (RASP) solution that helps you manage and mitigate risk from homegrown or third-party applications. It provides centralized visibility into application use and abuse while protecting from software vulnerability exploits and other violations in real time.

OpenText

SonarQube leads automated code review, enhancing code quality and security in AI-driven SDLCs. It analyzes pull requests, providing developers with actionable feedback and AI-driven fixes before code merges. Trusted by top enterprises, it supports SaaS and self-managed deployments.

SonarQube supports a wide range of programming languages and integrates seamlessly with CI/CD tools like Jenkins. It is renowned for its static code analysis, code coverage, and security vulnerability detection. While its open-source foundation and scalability are praised, users seek enhanced integration across multiple languages, better security features, and improved documentation. Despite challenges, its ability to automate code inspections and ensure compliance with coding standards makes it essential in software development processes, facilitating continuous improvement.

What are the most important features?

Language Support: Extensive support for multiple programming languages.
Custom Coding Rules: Allows defining project-specific rules.
Integration: Seamlessly works with Jenkins and CI/CD pipelines.
Quality Gates: Simplifies monitoring code quality.
Dashboards: Facilitates easy monitoring and management.
Static Code Analysis: Detects issues early in development.
Security Detection: Identifies vulnerabilities automatically.

What benefits should users look for?

Improved Code Quality: Enhances reliability and maintainability.
Security Assurance: Strengthens code against vulnerabilities.
Technical Debt Reduction: Ensures cleaner, maintainable code.
Efficient Feedback: Speeds up development cycles.
Standards Compliance: Aids in adhering to best practices.

In industries like finance, healthcare, and automotive, SonarQube is leveraged for static code analysis, automating code inspections, and ensuring compliance with stringent standards. Teams integrate it into their CI/CD pipelines to maintain high-quality code, identify security vulnerabilities, and enhance code maintainability.

SonarSource Sàrl

Sample Customers

ServiceMaster, Saltworks, SAP

Snowflake, Booking.com, Deutsche Bank, AstraZeneca, and Ford Motor Company.

Buyer's Guide

Fortify Application Defender vs. SonarQube

February 2026

Free Report: Fortify Application Defender vs. SonarQube

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify Application Defender vs. SonarQube and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Fortify Application Defender vs. SonarQube 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.