FOSSA vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing comparison

The compared FOSSA and OpenText solutions aren't in the same category. FOSSA is ranked #9 in SCA , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 3.1% mindshare in the category. OpenText is ranked #4 in SCAS , with an average rating of 7.5, and holds a 6.4% 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

1,810 Views
1,756 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

OpenText Static Application...

Read 19 OpenText Static Application Security Testing reviews

4,557 Views
1,367 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 Black Duck, Snyk, Veracode and others in Software Composition Analysis (SCA).

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

Buyer's Guide

Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

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

FOSSA

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (9th)

OpenText Static Application...

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

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 6.4% mindshare, down 11.0% since last year.

Software Composition Analysis (SCA) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
FOSSA	3.1%
Black Duck SCA	11.9%
Snyk	10.5%
Other	74.5%

Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

Static Code Analysis Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Static Application Security Testing	6.4%
Veracode	13.6%
Checkmarx One	10.5%
Other	69.5%

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

"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."

"I am impressed with the tool’s seamless integration and quick results."

"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."

"The most valuable feature is its ability to identify all of the components in a build, and then surface the licenses that are associated with it, allowing us to make a decision as to whether or not we allow a team to use the components. That eliminates the risk that comes with running consumer software that contains open source components."

"FOSSA suggests solutions for dependency mismatches."

"The scalability is excellent."

"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."

"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."

More FOSSA pros

"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've found the documentation to be very good."

"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."

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

"It's helped us free up staff time."

"The reference provided for each issue is extremely helpful."

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

More OpenText Static Application Security Testing pros

Cons

"Security scanning is an area for improvement. At this point, our experience is that we're only scanning for license information in components, and we're not scanning for security vulnerability information. We don't have access to that data. We use other tools for that. It would be an improvement for us to use one tool instead of two, so that we just have to go through one process instead of two."

"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."

"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."

"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 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."

"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."

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

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

More FOSSA cons

"The product shows false positives for Python applications."

"I have not seen a return on investment with Fortify Static Code Analyzer."

"I know the areas that they are trying to improve on. They've been getting feedback for several years. There are two main points. The first thing is keeping current with static code languages. I know it is difficult because code languages pop up all the time or there are new variants, but it is something that Fortify needs to put a better focus on. They need to keep current with their language support. The second thing is a philosophical issue, and I don't know if they'll ever change it. They've done a decent job of putting tools in place to mitigate things, but static code analysis is inherently noisy. If you just take a tool out of the box and run a scan, you're going to get a lot of results back, and not all of those results are interesting or important, which is different for every organization. Currently, we get four to five errors on the side of tagging, and it notifies you of every tiny inconsistency. If the tool sees something that it doesn't know, it flags, which becomes work that has to be done afterward. Clients don't typically like it. There has got to be a way of prioritizing. There are a ton of filter options within Fortify, but the problem is that you've got to go through the crazy noisy scan once before you know which filters you need to put in place to get to the interesting stuff. I keep hearing from their product team that they're working on a way to do container or docker scanning. That's a huge market mover. A lot of people are interested in that right now, and it is relevant. That is definitely something that I'd love to see in the next version or two."

"Streamlining the upgrade process and enhancing compatibility would make it easier for us to keep our security tools up-to-date."

"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."

"The troubleshooting capabilities of this solution could be improved. This would reduce the number of cases that users have to submit."

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

"The price can be improved."

More OpenText Static Application Security Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 cost is a five out of ten."

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

"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."

"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 price of Fortify Static Code Analyzer could be reduced."

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

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

"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."

"I rate the pricing of Fortify Static Code Analyzer as a seven out of ten since it is a bit expensive."

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

"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

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Computer Software Company

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

28%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing 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 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...

See all answers

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 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...

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

Comparisons

Snyk vs FOSSA

Compared 23% of the time

Black Duck SCA vs FOSSA

Compared 22% of the time

Mend.io vs FOSSA

Compared 9% of the time

JFrog Xray vs FOSSA

Compared 9% of the time

Contrast SCA vs FOSSA

Compared 3% of the time

More FOSSA Competitors

Black Duck SCA vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing

Compared 23% of the time

Snyk vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing

Compared 13% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing

Compared 11% of the time

Sonatype Lifecycle vs OpenText Static Application Security Testing

Compared 7% of the time

More OpenText Static Application Security Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

FOSSA

February 2026

Download FOSSA product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Static Application Security Testing

January 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

Up to 90% of any piece of software is from open source, creating countless dependencies and areas of risk to manage. FOSSA is the most reliable automated policy engine for legal teams to maintain license compliance, security to fix vulnerabilities, and engineering to improve code quality across the entire software supply chain. As the only developer-native open source management platform, FOSSA fully integrates with your existing CI/CD pipeline to provide complete visibility and context earlier in the software development lifecycle. For the first time, teams can collaboratively shift left and audit, analyze, control, and remediate license issues and vulnerabilities right in their existing workflows.

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)

February 2026

Download Free Report

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 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.