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

FOSSA vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
15
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (9th)
OpenText Static Application...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Static Code Analysis (4th)
 

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 3.1%, down 3.5% compared to last year.
OpenText Static Application Security Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Static Code Analysis, holds 7.4% mindshare, down 10.9% since last year.
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
FOSSA3.1%
Black Duck SCA12.5%
Snyk10.8%
Other73.6%
Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
Static Code Analysis Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Static Application Security Testing7.4%
Veracode14.5%
Checkmarx One10.8%
Other67.3%
Static Code Analysis
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2588340 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
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

"What I really need from FOSSA, and it does a really good job of this, is to flag me when there are particular open source licenses that cause me or our legal department concern. It points out where a particular issue is, where it comes from, and the chain that brought it in, which is the most important part to me."
"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."
"One of the things that I really like about FOSSA is that it allows you to go very granular. For example, if there's a package that's been flagged because it's subject to a license that may be conflicts with or raises a concern with one of the policies that I've set, then FOSSA enables you to go really granular into that package to see which aspects of the package are subject to which licenses. We can ultimately determine with our engineering teams if we really need this part of the package or not. If it's raising this flag, we can make really actionable decisions at a very micro level to enable the build to keep pushing forward."
"The support team has just been amazing, and it helps us to have a great support team from FOSSA. They are there to triage and answer all our questions which come up by using their product."
"The scalability is excellent."
"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 is easy to use and set up, provides relatively accurate results, and doesn't require armies of people to get value from its use."
"FOSSA allows us to keep track of all dependencies to ensure they are up to date and not causing any vulnerabilities."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer tells us if there are any security leaks or not. If there are, then it's notifying us and does not allow us to pass the DevOps pipeline. If it is finds everything's perfect, as per our given guidelines, then it is allowing us to go ahead and start it, and we are able to deploy it."
"It's helped us free up staff time."
"The Software Security Center, which is often overlooked, stands out as the most effective feature."
"You can really see what's happening after you've developed something."
"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."
"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."
"We've found the documentation to be very good."
"We are satisfied with this solution."
 

Cons

"The technical support has room for improvement."
"I wish there was a way that you could have a more global rollout of it, instead of having to do it in each repository individually. It's possible, that's something that is offered now, or maybe if you were using the CI Jenkins, you'd be able to do that. But with Travis, there wasn't an easy way to do that. At least not that I could find. That was probably the biggest issue."
"While running a FOSSA scan, it takes time for the results to reflect in the FOSSA UI portal."
"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."
"We have seen some inaccuracies or incompleteness with the distribution acknowledgments for an application, so there's certainly some room for improvement there. Another big feature that's missing that should be introduced is snippet matching, meaning, not just matching an entire component, but matching a snippet of code that had been for another project and put in different files that one of our developers may have created."
"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."
"For open-source management, FOSSA's out-of-the-box policy engine is easy to use, but the list of licenses is not as complete as we would like it to be. They should add more open-source licenses to the selection."
"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."
"I have not seen a return on investment with Fortify Static Code Analyzer."
"Their licensing is expensive."
"Not all languages are supported in Fortify."
"I'm not sure if Fortify Static Code Analyzer has AI capabilities. Currently, this solution doesn't quite have what we need."
"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."
"The pricing is a bit high."
"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."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"The solution's pricing is good and reasonable because you can literally use a lot of it for free."
"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."
"The solution's cost is a five out of ten."
"The licensing is expensive and is in the 50K range."
"Although I am not responsible for the budget, Fortify SAST is expensive."
"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."
"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."
"The price of Fortify Static Code Analyzer could be reduced."
"From our standpoint, we are significantly better off with Fortify due to the favorable pricing we secured five years ago."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FOSSA?
The solution's pricing is good and reasonable because you can literally use a lot of it for free. You have to pay for the features you need, which I think is fair. If you want to get value for free...
What needs improvement with FOSSA?
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 lin...
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...
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

No data available
Fortify Static Code Analysis SAST
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AppDyanmic, Uber, Twitter, Zendesk, Confluent
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Snyk, Black Duck, Veracode and others in Software Composition Analysis (SCA). Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.