Fortify Software Security Center vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Fortify Software Security Center and OpenText Core Application Security are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Fortify Software Security Center is ranked #19 with an average rating of 9.0, while OpenText Core Application Security is ranked #12 with an average rating of 7.3. Fortify Software Security Center holds a 1.2% mindshare in SAST, compared to OpenText Core Application Security’s 3.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Fortify Software Security Center users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText Core Application Security 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 Core Application S...

Read 62 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

6,593 Views
4,945 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Fortify Software Security C...

OpenText Core Application S...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

Fortify Software Security Center and OpenText Core Application Security compete in the software security market. While Fortify Software Security Center holds an edge in vulnerability detection capabilities, OpenText Core Application Security shines in integration capabilities.

Features: Fortify Software Security Center offers comprehensive vulnerabilities detection, extensive static code analysis, and integration into CI/CD processes. OpenText Core Application Security provides seamless integration with various development environments, efficient API security testing, and deep application security testing.

Room for Improvement: Fortify Software Security Center could enhance its dynamic analysis capabilities, improve false positive rates, and offer better support for newer programming languages. OpenText Core Application Security would benefit from simplifying initial configuration, expanding its documentation resources, and enhancing customizability for intricate security scenarios.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Fortify Software Security Center is noted for a straightforward deployment process and responsive customer service. OpenText Core Application Security, while initially more complex to configure, benefits from a supportive installation team and ongoing technical assistance.

Pricing and ROI: Fortify Software Security Center features competitive pricing with a favorable ROI, particularly for enterprises focusing on code analysis. OpenText Core Application Security, although more expensive upfront, offers substantial long-term ROI due to its comprehensive security approach and integration strengths.

To learn more, read our detailed Fortify Software Security Center vs. OpenText Core Application Security Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Fortify Software Security Center vs. OpenText Core Application Security

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...

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

19th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

4.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Core Application S...

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (14th)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Fortify Software Security Center is 1.2%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.0%, down from 4.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Core Application Security	3.0%
Fortify Software Security Center	1.2%
Other	95.8%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

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

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

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

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

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

"It's very important because they want to scan their source code every day, so we provide CICD integration to our customers so they can auto build and auto test every day, get reports, and fix issues."

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

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

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

"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."

More Fortify Software Security Center pros

"What stands out to me is the user-friendliness of each feature."

"The most valuable feature is the capacity to be able to check vulnerabilities during the development process. The development team can check whether the code they are using is vulnerable to some type of attack or there is some type of vulnerability so that they can mitigate it. It helps us in achieving a more secure approach towards internal applications. It is an intuitive solution. It gives all the information that a developer needs to remediate a vulnerability in the coding process. It also gives you some examples of how to remediate a vulnerability in different programming languages. This solution is pretty much what we were searching for."

"The vulnerability detection and scanning are awesome features."

"The most important feature of the product is to follow today's technology fast, updated rules and algorithms (of the product)."

"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."

"It's a stable and scalable 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."

"The solution scans our code and provides us with a dashboard of all the vulnerabilities and the criticality of the vulnerabilities. It is very useful that they provide right then and there all the information about the vulnerability, including possible fixes, as well as some additional documentation and links to the authoritative sources of why this is an issue and what's the correct way to deal with it."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

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

"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."

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

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

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

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

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

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

"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."

"It does scanning for all virtual machines and other things, but it doesn't do the scanning for containers. It currently lacks the ability to do the scanning on containers. We're asking their product management team to expand this capability to containers."

"With Rapid7 I utilized its reporting capabilities to deliver Client Reports within just a few minutes of checking the data. I believe that HP’s FoD Clients could sell more services to clients if HP put more effort into delivering visually pleasing reporting capabilities."

"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."

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

"There were some regulated compliances, which were not there."

"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."

"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."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"The solution is priced fair."

"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."

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

"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."

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

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."

"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."

"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."

More OpenText Core Application Security pricing and cost advice

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

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Computer Software Company

Government

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	17
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	44

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 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

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

Coverity Static vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

Acunetix vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 6% of the time

More Fortify Software Security Center Competitors

SonarQube vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 18% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 11% of the time

Coverity Static vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 6% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 6% of the time

Mend.io vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 2% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

February 2026

Download Fortify Software Security Center product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Application Security

January 2026

OpenText Core Application Security report

Download OpenText Core Application Security product report

Also Known As

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

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand

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 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

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

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

Buyer's Guide

Fortify Software Security Center vs. OpenText Core Application Security

February 2026

Free Report: Fortify Software Security Center vs. OpenText Core Application Security

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify Software Security Center vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Fortify Software Security Center vs. OpenText Core Application Security report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

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.