Fortify Software Security Center vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

The compared Fortify Software Security Center and OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing solutions aren't in the same category. Fortify Software Security Center is ranked #19 in SAST , with an average rating of 9.0, and holds a 1.2% mindshare in the category. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is ranked #3 in DAST , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 11.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Fortify Software Security Center users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing users who would recommend it.

Fortify Software Security C...

Read 8 Fortify Software Security Center reviews

1,160 Views
1,102 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Read 22 OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing reviews

3,095 Views
1,145 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Fortify Software Security C...

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Fortify Software Security Center and OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST).

To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

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 Software Security C...

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

4.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (19th)

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd), DevSecOps (9th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Fortify Software Security Center is designed for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and holds a mindshare of 1.2%, up 0.4% compared to last year.
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), holds 11.0% mindshare, up 9.5% since last year.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Fortify Software Security Center	1.2%
SonarQube	18.2%
Checkmarx One	10.3%
Other	70.3%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing	11.0%
Veracode	18.2%
Checkmarx One	17.0%
Other	53.8%

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

Featured Reviews

Diego Caicedo Lescano

Chief Innovation Officer at SAGGA

Enables centralized analysis and improves governance through seamless tool integration

The main use case for Fortify Software Security Center is exceptional because we have governance and control through that console. You can centralize both static analysis and dynamic analysis, and correlate both analyses in one tool to get better results by combining those independent results from each solution. That is outstanding, and there is no tool I have seen on the market that offers these capabilities. I appreciate the interoperability with other solutions from Fortify Software Security Center. Because we are using Kiuwan, you can run Kiuwan analyses and integrate them with Fortify Software Security Center to get those results in a single console. That is a good console for centralizing things in one point. That is one of the best features of the on-premises Fortify.

Read full review

ArnabPaul

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.

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 main use case for Fortify Software Security Center is exceptional because we have governance and control through that console."

"I like the explanation of issues provided by Fortify Software Security Center."

"The overall rating for this tool is ten out of ten."

"This is a stable solution at the end of the day."

"Software Security Center is highly customizable and helps me test all vulnerability data against the latest conventions like OWASP Top Ten, CVE Top twenty-five, and several other legal compliances."

"You can easily download the tool's rule packs and update them."

"Fortify Analytics' AI function helps scan and provides more detailed explanations and recommendations about vulnerabilities."

"The reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."

More Fortify Software Security Center pros

"The accuracy of its scans is great."

"When we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities. Comparison is easy in SSC."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."

"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."

"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."

"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."

"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."

"The solution is easy to use."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing pros

Cons

"This solution is difficult to implement, and it should be made more comfortable for the end-users."

"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."

"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."

"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."

"The product's overlap feature is restrictive and requires more customization efforts, which can be expensive."

"I am not satisfied with the percentage of false positives, which is around eighteen percent."

"The support for Fortify on-premises is the same as for the other products. I would say the support is not good and I would rate it a three out of ten."

"We are having issues with false positives that need to be resolved."

"One thing I would like to see them introduce is a cloud-based platform."

"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should 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."

"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."

"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."

"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."

"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 scanner could be better."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is priced fair."

"As a Fortify partner company providing technical support, I find the product expensive in our country, where local, inexpensive products are available."

"This is a costly solution that could be cheaper."

"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."

"The price is okay."

"It’s a fair price for the solution."

"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."

"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."

"This solution is very expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

Government

15%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	3

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	15

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Software Security Center?

The pricing for the on-premises Fortify is expensive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Software Security Center?

In my opinion, there are no areas that could be improved with Fortify Software Security Center. I would say it is a good product and a mature product. However, the SAST has many improvement areas. ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Software Security Center?

We have installed Fortify Static Code Analysis, SAST, in Ecuador in two customers. The Fortify ScanCentral includes three components: SAST, Fortify Software Security Center, and the WebInspect.

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Checkmarx One vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 25% of the time

Checkmarx IaC Security / KICS vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 13% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 9% of the time

Coverity Static vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

More Fortify Software Security Center Competitors

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 22% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 7% of the time

OWASP Zap vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 5% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 5% of the time

HCL AppScan vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

February 2026

Download Fortify Software Security Center product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

January 2026

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report

Download OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus Software Security Center, Application Security Center, HPE Application Security Center, WebInspect

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect

Overview

Software Security Center enables management, development, and security teams to work together to triage, track, validate, automate, and manage software security activities.

OpenText

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing offers robust scalability, ease of use, and high accuracy in scanning, making it a valuable tool for enterprises.

This security testing platform is known for its centralized dashboard, guided scans, and comprehensive reporting. It integrates seamlessly with tools like Fortify code scanner and supports extensive vulnerability detection and analysis, enhancing efficiency in security management. Despite its strengths, users suggest improvements in cloud integration, cost-effectiveness, and installation processes. Faster scans, reduced false positives, and improved mobile testing features are also desired.

What are the key features of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing?

Scalability: Easily adapts to changing enterprise needs.
Ease of Use: User-friendly interface with guided scans.
Comprehensive Reporting: Detailed vulnerability analysis and reporting.
Integration Capabilities: Works with Fortify code scanner and user authentication scanning.
Wide Vulnerability Detection: Identifies extensive security vulnerabilities.

What benefits should users expect from reviews?

Efficient Vulnerability Management: Streamlines security management in development environments.
Detailed Analysis: Provides in-depth insights into security issues.
Quick Setup: Easy to deploy within existing systems.
Enterprise Preference: Supports enterprise environments efficiently.

In industries like BFSI, OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is employed for performance network application testing, dynamic and static application security testing, and code checks. Security and QA teams use it in development processes to ensure application security prior to release, proving integral in both enterprise and testing environments.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Neosecure, Acxiom, Skandinavisk Data Center A/S, Parkeon

Aaron's

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

February 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.