FOSSA vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing comparison

Why PeerSpot?

The compared FOSSA and OpenText solutions aren't in the same category. FOSSA is ranked #19 in SCA , and holds a 2.2% mindshare in the category. OpenText is ranked #7 in SCAS , with an average rating of 8.3, and holds a 4.5% mindshare. Additionally, 92% of FOSSA users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

FOSSA

Read 15 FOSSA reviews

3,091 Views
3,029 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

OpenText Static Application...

Read 19 OpenText Static Application Security Testing reviews

4,175 Views
2,255 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

FOSSA

OpenText Static Application...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between FOSSA and OpenText Static Application Security Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Snyk, Veracode, Black Duck and others in Software Composition Analysis (SCA).

To learn more, read our detailed Software Composition Analysis (SCA) Report (Updated: October 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

October 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,769 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

FOSSA

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (19th)

OpenText Static Application...

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Code Analysis (7th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. FOSSA is designed for Software Composition Analysis (SCA) and holds a mindshare of 2.2%, down 3.1% compared to last year.
OpenText Static Application Security Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Static Code Analysis, holds 4.5% mindshare, down 9.1% since last year.

Software Composition Analysis (SCA) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
FOSSA	2.2%
Snyk	11.1%
Black Duck SCA	8.7%
Other	78.0%

Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

Static Code Analysis Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Static Application Security Testing	4.5%
Veracode	10.9%
Checkmarx One	8.5%
Other	76.1%

Static Code Analysis

Featured Reviews

reviewer2588340

Senior Software Engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Dependency management enhanced with update suggestions but lacks precise vulnerability tracking

FOSSA does not show the exact line of code with vulnerabilities, which adds time to the process as we have to locate these manually. Some other tools like Check Point or SonarQube provide exact line numbers for bugs. Also, the process in FOSSA can be quite contradicting and not very straightforward for new users.

Read full review

Dristi Kurre

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.

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

"Overall, it's a great product."

"Their CLI tool is very efficient. It does not send your source code over to their servers. It just does fingerprinting. It is also very easy to integrate into software development practices."

"FOSSA allows us to keep track of all dependencies to ensure they are up to date and not causing any vulnerabilities."

"Policies and identification of open-source licensing issues are the most valuable features. It reduces the time needed to identify open-source software licensing issues."

"I found FOSSA's out-of-the-box policy engine to be accurate and that it was tuned appropriately to the settings that we were looking for. The policy engine is pretty straightforward... I find it to be very straightforward to make small modifications to, but it's very rare that we have to make modifications to it. It's easy to use. It's a four-category system that handles most cases pretty well."

"FOSSA is easy to use and set up, provides relatively accurate results, and doesn't require armies of people to get value from its use."

"The most valuable feature is definitely the ease and speed of integrating into build pipelines, like a Jenkins pipeline or something along those lines. The ease of a new development team coming on board and integrating FOSSA with a new project, or even an existing project, can be done so quickly that it's invaluable and it's easy to ask the developers to use a tool like this. Those developers greatly value the very quick feedback they get on any licensing or security vulnerability issues."

"Prior to a Puppet Enterprise release, it would take approximately two to three weeks of dedicated engineering time by a single release engineer to go through license compliance, and we just did a release in late July or early August, and with FOSSA our license compliance review took five to ten minutes."

More FOSSA pros

"The stability is good; I'm not running into anything that gives me a problem as far as my pipelines are concerned, and for what I use it for, it is sufficient and I get the results that I'm looking for."

"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 password credentials and access keys embedded in the code."

"The most valuable features include its ability to detect vulnerabilities accurately and its integration with our CI/CD pipeline."

"Its flexibility is most valuable. It is such a flexible tool. It can be implemented in a number of ways. It can do anything you want it to do. It can be fully automated within a DevOps pipeline. It can also be used in an ad hoc, special test case scenario and anywhere in between."

"My initial setup of Fortify Static Code Analyzer was good."

"We are satisfied with this solution."

"The integration Subset core integration, using Jenkins is one of the good features."

"You can really see what's happening after you've developed something."

More OpenText Static Application Security Testing pros

Cons

"FOSSA does not show the exact line of code with vulnerabilities, which adds time to the process as we have to locate these manually."

"I would like more customized categories because our company is so big."

"I would like the FOSSA API to be broader. I would like not to have to interact with the GUI at all, to do the work that I want to do. I would like them to do API-first development, rather than a focus on the GUI."

"One thing that can sometimes be difficult with FOSSA is understanding all that it can do. One of the ways that I've been able to unlock some of those more advanced features is through conversations with the absolutely awesome customer success team at FOSSA, but it has been a little bit difficult to find some of that information separately on my own through FAQs and other information channels that FOSSA has. The improvement is less about the product itself and more about empowering FOSSA customers to know and understand how to unlock its full potential."

"If you have thousands of applications, organizing them all into teams or tags is challenging."

"The solution provides contextualized, actionable, intelligence that alerts us to compliance issues, but there is still a little bit of work to be done on it. One of the issues that I have raised with FOSSA is that when it identifies an issue that is an error, why is it in error? What detail can they give to me? They've improved, but that still needs some work. They could provide more information that helps me to identify the dependencies and then figure out where they originated from."

"I want the product to include binary scanning which is missing at the moment. Binary scanning includes code and component matching through dependency management. It also includes the actual scanning and reverse engineering of the boundaries and finding out what is inside."

"On the legal and policy sides, there is some room for improvement. I know that our legal team has raised complaints about having to approve the same dependency multiple times, as opposed to having them it across the entire organization."

More FOSSA cons

"It can be tricky if you want to exclude some files from scanning. For instance, if you do not want to scan and push testing files to Fortify Software Security Center, that is tricky with some IDEs, such as IntelliJ. We found that there is an Exclude feature that is not working. We reported that to them for future fixing. It needs some work on the plugins to make them consistent across IDEs and make them easier."

"False positives need improvement in the future. Fortify's vulnerability remediation guidance helps improve code security, but I think they need to improve the focus of the solution, as it still contains many bugs and needs a thorough review."

"I'm not sure if Fortify Static Code Analyzer has AI capabilities. Currently, this solution doesn't quite have what we need."

"Currently, we get four to five errors on the side of tagging, and it notifies you of every tiny inconsistency."

"The pricing is a bit high. It would be nice if it was more competitive."

"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."

"Fortify's software security center needs a design refresh."

"Fortify Static Code Analyzer has a bit of a learning curve, and I don't find it particularly helpful in narrowing down the vulnerabilities we should prioritize."

More OpenText Static Application Security Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's pricing is good and reasonable because you can literally use a lot of it for free."

"The solution's cost is a five out of ten."

"FOSSA is a fairly priced product. It is not either cheaper or expensive. The pricing lies somewhere in the middle. The solution is worth the money that we are spending to use it."

"Its price is reasonable as compared to the market. It is competitively priced in comparison to other similar solutions on the market. It is also quite affordable in terms of the value that it delivers as compared to its alternative of hiring a team."

"FOSSA is not cheap, but their offering is top-notch. It is very much a "you get what you pay for" scenario. Regardless of the price, I highly recommend FOSSA."

"The setup costs and pricing for Fortify may vary depending on the organization's needs and requirements."

"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."

"From our standpoint, we are significantly better off with Fortify due to the favorable pricing we secured five years ago."

"Although I am not responsible for the budget, Fortify SAST is expensive."

"The licensing is expensive and is in the 50K range."

"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."

"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."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

20%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Comms Service Provider

University

Financial Services Firm

22%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	8

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	11

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with FOSSA?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for FOSSA?

I have worked with FOSSA primarily to manage the dependencies in our projects. For example, if I take a Spring Boot application, FOSSA helps in identifying mismatches or unsupported dependencies th...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering FOSSA?

For those seeking to ensure their application is updated with the latest features, FOSSA can be a beneficial add-on. However, it should not replace your existing primary security solutions such as ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Fortify Static Code Analyzer?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Fortify Static Code Analyzer?

Our main use cases for Fortify Static Code Analyzer typically involve trying to figure out the critical vulnerabilities. It depends on the type of scans that we are doing, whether it is a release s...

See all answers

Comparisons

Snyk vs FOSSA

Compared 22% of the time

Black Duck SCA vs FOSSA

Compared 19% of the time

Contrast SCA vs FOSSA

Compared 11% of the time

Mend.io vs FOSSA

Compared 6% of the time

More FOSSA Competitors

Veracode vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing

Compared 9% of the time

Semgrep vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing

Compared 8% of the time

Black Duck SCA vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing

Compared 7% of the time

Kiuwan Insights vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing

Compared 6% of the time

ReShaper vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing

Compared 6% of the time

More OpenText Static Application Security Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

FOSSA

October 2026

Download FOSSA product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Static Application Security Testing

October 2026

OpenText Static Application Security Testing report

Download OpenText Static Application Security Testing product report

Also Known As

No data available

Fortify Static Code Analysis SAST

Overview

FOSSA automates license compliance and manages dependencies in development environments, offering efficient policy engines and integration with build pipelines, valuable to legal and DevOps teams.

FOSSA offers deep dependency scanning, seamless compatibility with developer tools, and integrates smoothly into CI/CD pipelines. It automates license checks to save resources and maintains policy compliance. It helps in identifying open-source licensing issues and tracks dependencies to prevent vulnerabilities, easing developer workload and enhancing security practices. Despite these advantages, it requires improvements in security scanning, project categorization, and has calls for enhanced reporting and documentation. Also desired are API improvements, a broader license selection, and more global repository coverage.

What are the key features?

Deep Dependency Scanning: Evaluates dependencies to prevent vulnerabilities.
Integration with Developer Tools: Compatible with a wide range of tools.
Policy Engine: Automates license checks for compliance.
Command-Line Tool: Monitors open-source components efficiently.

What benefits should be considered?

Reduced Developer Workload: Automates processes to lessen manual tasks.
Improved Security: Identifies and mitigates vulnerabilities.
Compliance Assurance: Ensures adherence to licensing policies.
Resource Efficiency: Saves time and effort in dependency management.

In specific industries, FOSSA is used for compliance and dependency management in mobile application build processes. It scans client-facing app dependencies to identify licensing issues, integrating seamlessly into CI/CD pipelines. Its command-line tool supports legal and engineering teams in addressing licensing concerns efficiently.

FOSSA

OpenText Static Application Security Testing empowers teams with efficient vulnerability detection and streamlined secure coding practices, offering comprehensive language support and seamless integration with development tools.

OpenText Static Application Security Testing enhances software security during development by accurately identifying vulnerabilities with minimal false positives. It integrates seamlessly with IDEs and CI/CD pipelines, making it highly efficient for early detection of security issues. Users benefit from its easy setup, clear documentation, and centralized portal for managing security findings. Despite facing challenges like high costs and complex configurations for certain languages, its role in facilitating compliance and streamlining secure coding processes is indispensable. Improvements are needed in areas such as outdated design, language support, and integration capabilities to meet evolving user expectations.

What features does OpenText Static Application Security Testing offer?

Seamless IDE Integration: Integrates effortlessly with development environments for real-time feedback.
Comprehensive Language Support: Covers a wide range of programming languages, enhancing detection accuracy.
Centralized Security Portal: Provides a streamlined interface for managing vulnerabilities.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Enhanced Security: Identifies vulnerabilities early, preventing potential breaches.
Time Efficiency: Automates processes and speeds up remediation efforts.
Compliance Facilitation: Assists in adhering to security standards and regulations.

Organizations across diverse sectors implement OpenText Static Application Security Testing primarily to secure applications during development phases. Its integration with tools like GitLab, Jenkins, and Azure DevOps ensures a robust security pipeline. By combining with Sonatype Nexus, secure code, and library management is achieved effectively.

OpenText

Sample Customers

AppDyanmic, Uber, Twitter, Zendesk, Confluent

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

October 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Snyk, Veracode, Black Duck and others in Software Composition Analysis (SCA). Updated: October 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

We monitor all Software Composition Analysis (SCA) 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.