Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Kiuwan Insights vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

Kiuwan Insights
Ranking in Static Code Analysis
24th
Average Rating
4.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Static Application...
Ranking in Static Code Analysis
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Static Code Analysis category, the mindshare of Kiuwan Insights is 1.2%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Static Application Security Testing is 6.4%, down from 11.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Code Analysis Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Static Application Security Testing6.4%
Kiuwan Insights1.2%
Other92.4%
Static Code Analysis
 

Featured Reviews

FE
Head of Development and Consulting at Logalty
Protects problematic libraries; sorely lacking in customer services
Kiuwan lacks decent support, it's very bad. A couple of years ago an American company bought Kiuwan and support became non-existent. It's a big part of why we're looking to move to another product. We have questions regarding false positives and nobody responds to our tickets. They don't have any answers. If you're looking for a cheaper solution and don't require support, it might be okay, but a large end company that has a lot of questions about how the developers are programming will have trouble.
DK
Lead Information Security Analyst at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Focuses on detailed scans to find critical vulnerabilities while ensuring minimal false positives
I think Fortify Static Code Analyzer could be improved by updating the number of rule packs according to the latest vulnerabilities we find each year. We have updated to a version that is one less than the current latest version. It would be really helpful to include trending vulnerabilities and how to manage them. While it includes all the OWASP top factors, AI has come into the picture, so those updates should also be considered. I haven't thought much about additional features for improvement since I am using it daily. Most of our work revolves around scanning and providing the results, which sometimes feels like a crunch. However, I believe rule pack updates should be implemented. It feels easy to upgrade to the latest version as well.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Can help in reducing the number of false positives."
"I have found the interface to be perfect."
"You can really see what's happening after you've developed something."
"My initial setup of Fortify Static Code Analyzer was good."
"The most valuable features include its ability to detect vulnerabilities accurately and its integration with our CI/CD pipeline."
"The integration Subset core integration, using Jenkins is one of the good features."
"The reference provided for each issue is extremely helpful."
"I like the Fortify taxonomy as it provides us with a list of all of the vulnerabilities found. Fortify release updated rule packs quarterly, with accompanying documentation, that lets us know what new features are being released."
"It's helped us free up staff time."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer's most valuable features are its ability to provide best practices for fixing code and its examples and capabilities to address security problems in the code. It effectively identifies security vulnerabilities by analyzing the code and offering insights on improving it."
 

Cons

"The solution is great, but improvement is needed in the number of lines of code allowed, that is the capacity. Pricing can be improved as well."
"The solution has issues detecting intrusive methods."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer is a good solution, but sometimes we receive false positives. If they could reduce the number of false positives it would be good."
"The pricing is a bit high."
"The generation of false positives should be reduced."
"Fortify's software security center needs a design refresh."
"The generation of false positives should be reduced."
"I have not seen a return on investment with Fortify Static Code Analyzer."
"Streamlining the upgrade process and enhancing compatibility would make it easier for us to keep our security tools up-to-date."
"Not all languages are supported in Fortify."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing can be improved as well."
"The price of Fortify Static Code Analyzer could be reduced."
"I rate the pricing of Fortify Static Code Analyzer as a seven out of ten since it is a bit expensive."
"The licensing is expensive and is in the 50K range."
"There is a licensing fee, and if you bring them to the company and you want them to do the installation and the implementation in the beginning, there is a separate cost. Similarly, if you want consultation or training, there is a separate cost. I see it as suitable only for enterprises. I do not see it suitable for a small business or individual use."
"The setup costs and pricing for Fortify may vary depending on the organization's needs and requirements."
"Although I am not responsible for the budget, Fortify SAST is expensive."
"From our standpoint, we are significantly better off with Fortify due to the favorable pricing we secured five years ago."
"It has a couple of license models. The one that we use most frequently is called their flexible deployment. We use this one because it is flexible and based on the number of code-contributing developers in the organization. It includes almost everything in the Fortify suite for one developer price. It gives access to not just the secure code analyzer (SCA) but also to FSC, the secure code. It gives us accessibility to scan central, which is the decentralized scanning farm. It also gives us access to the software security center, which is the vulnerability management platform."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Code Analysis solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Fortify Static Code Analyzer?
Integrating the Fortify Static Code Analyzer into our software development lifecycle was straightforward. It highlights important information beyond just syntax errors. It identifies issues like pa...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify Static Code Analyzer?
My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing has been good. We have the scan machines, and we are planning to request more from Micro Focus now. We have calls every month or every oth...
What needs improvement with Fortify Static Code Analyzer?
I think Fortify Static Code Analyzer could be improved by updating the number of rule packs according to the latest vulnerabilities we find each year. We have updated to a version that is one less ...
 

Also Known As

Insights SCA
Fortify Static Code Analysis SAST
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Kiuwan Insights vs. OpenText Static Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.