HCL AppScan vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

HCLSoftware and OpenText are both solutions in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category. HCLSoftware is ranked #7 with an average rating of 7.0, while OpenText is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.0. HCLSoftware holds a 8.7% mindshare in DAST, compared to OpenText’s 11.7% mindshare. Additionally, 84% of HCLSoftware users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

HCL AppScan

Read 44 HCL AppScan reviews

7,882 Views
2,128 Comparison Views

84% willing to recommend

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Read 22 OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing reviews

6,513 Views
2,670 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

HCL AppScan

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

HCL AppScan and OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing compete in the field of application security testing. HCL AppScan appears to have an edge in software development lifecycle integration, while OpenText excels in vulnerability analysis and API testing.

Features: HCL AppScan is noted for its integration capabilities with the software development lifecycle, scanning during code construction, and dynamic scanning. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing offers user authentication scanning, comprehensive vulnerability analysis, and dynamic scanning.

Room for Improvement: HCL AppScan could improve by reducing false positives and enhancing user-friendliness and technical support. OpenText faces challenges with high resource utilization and should improve integration with other tools and scanning speed.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: HCL AppScan provides varied deployment options, primarily on-premises with public cloud availability, though support experiences vary. OpenText supports hybrid cloud deployments, but customer service has been criticized for inconsistent response times.

Pricing and ROI: HCL AppScan is seen as expensive but offers value-driven pricing with benefits in vulnerability reduction, while OpenText is also costly for enterprise setups but justifies its price through stability.

To learn more, read our detailed HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Report (Updated: June 2026).

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 908,800 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

HCL AppScan

Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

7th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

5.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (23rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (18th)

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

3rd

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

DevSecOps (10th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of HCL AppScan is 8.7%, down from 11.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 11.7%, up from 10.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing	11.7%
HCL AppScan	8.7%
Other	79.6%

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

Featured Reviews

Ravi Khanchandani

Founder Director at Techsa Services

Has improved identification of encryption and authentication issues across cloud and on-prem applications

During the learning curve of onboarding HCL AppScan, we learned that HCL has altered the portfolio and now offers HCL AppScan 360, which has a much better look and feel with an improved user interface. However, there is one feature called SCA, which stands for Software Composition Analysis, that could be improved. When I'm doing an application scan, HCL AppScan has the ability to generate information about what components are in use. For example, if I'm scanning a web application, it shows me the various components being used. It tells me whether I have Java libraries, .NET frameworks, or other log management libraries such as Log4j, and what versions of those specific components are present. I would like to see more detailed reports from the tool. Currently, you can find out the components belonging to a specific software, but if detailed reporting became available, you would be in a better position to identify vulnerabilities. For instance, I could identify that I had the Log4j vulnerability and know that I need to fix my application accordingly. If they add the features I'm describing, I would consider giving them a higher rating. However, I've only been experienced with the product for three months.

Read full review

ArnabPaul

Cyber Security Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Enhancements in manual testing align with reporting and integration features

WebInspect works efficiently with Java-based or .NET based applications. However, it struggles with Salesforce applications, where it requires approximately 20-24 hours to crawl and audit but produces minimal findings, necessitating manual verification. The solution offers customization features for crawling and vulnerability detection. It includes various security frameworks and allows selection of specific vulnerability types to audit, such as OWASP Top 10 or JavaScript-based vulnerabilities. When working with APIs, we can select OWASP API Top 10. The tool also supports custom audit features by combining different security frameworks. For on-premises deployment, the setup is complex, particularly regarding SQL server configuration. Unlike Burp Suite or OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, which have simpler setup processes, WebInspect requires SQL server setup to function.

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

"The support I have received has been good."

"IBM Applications Security has contributed to the maturity of our AppSec risk management program."

"The static scans are good, and the SaaS as well."

"We catch them, we fix them, and we can offer a higher quality product to our clients."

"It is easy it is to use. It is quick to find things, because of the code scanning tools. It's quite simple to use and it is very good the way it reports the findings."

"It provides a better integration for our ecosystem."

"Compared to other tools only AppScan supports special language."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is Postman."

More HCL AppScan pros

"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."

"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."

"My experience with technical support has been good."

"The tool provides comprehensive vulnerability assessments which help ensure our deliverables are as free from vulnerabilities as possible. It has also streamlined our web application vulnerability assessments, assisting us in delivering secure applications to our clients."

"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."

"It is scalable and very easy to use."

"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing pros

Cons

"Currently, we are satisfied with AppScan but I am sure there are better alternatives available because this is a very old product."

"A desktop version should be added."

"The solution's scalability can be a matter of concern because one license runs on one machine only."

"I would like to see the roadmap for this product. We are still waiting to see it as we have only so many resources."

"They could incorporate AI to enhance vulnerability detection and improve the product's reporting capabilities."

"The solution often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."

"It has crashed at times."

"Better detection of DOM-based XSS Better remediation guidance using code examples and contexts"

More HCL AppScan cons

"The initial setup was complex."

"A localized version, for example, in Korean would be a big improvement to this solution."

"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."

"We have had a problem with authentification."

"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."

"We have often encountered scanning errors."

"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."

"The first time we ran the module, it was okay, however, the next time we ran it, it almost crashed."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."

"Pricing was the main reason that we went ahead with this solution as they were the lowest in the market."

"AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."

"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."

"HCL AppScan is expensive."

"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."

"I would rate the product's pricing a nine out of ten. The product's pricing is expensive compared to the features that they offer."

"The product is moderately priced, though it's an investment due to extensive code analysis needs."

More HCL AppScan pricing and cost advice

"The price is okay."

"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."

"This solution is very expensive."

"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."

"It’s a fair price for the solution."

"Its price is almost similar to the price of AppScan. Both of them are very costly. Its price could be reduced because it can be very costly for unlimited IT scans, etc. I'm not sure, but it can go up to $40,000 to $50,000 or more than that."

"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Construction Company

Financial Services Firm

12%

Government

12%

Manufacturing Company

Outsourcing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	31

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	15

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?

I'm currently working with BigFix and HCL AppScan. At least three people in my company are using HCL AppScan. Since we are a reseller, we run it in both lab environments and live production applica...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HCL AppScan?

AppScan is considered more cost-effective than Veracode, although I have not updated the exact pricing details. Companies often choose based on budget constraints, with Veracode being on the higher...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?

While I am not directly involved with licensing, I can share that our project's license for 1-9 applications costs between $15,000 to $19,000. In comparison, Burp Suite costs approximately $500 to ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Fortify WebInspect?

I am currently working with several tools. For Fortify, I use SCA and WebInspect. Apart from that, I use Burp Suite from PortSwigger. For API testing, I use Postman with Burp Suite or WebInspect fo...

See all answers

Comparisons

Veracode vs HCL AppScan

Compared 8% of the time

Checkmarx One vs HCL AppScan

Compared 7% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs HCL AppScan

Compared 6% of the time

Acunetix vs HCL AppScan

Compared 5% of the time

Invicti vs HCL AppScan

Compared 4% of the time

More HCL AppScan Competitors

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 31% of the time

Acunetix vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 7% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 6% of the time

Check Point CloudGuard Code Security vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 5% of the time

Fortra's Beyond Security BeSTORM vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan

July 2026

Download HCL AppScan product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

July 2026

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report

Download OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing product report

Also Known As

IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect

Overview

HCL AppScan offers quick vulnerability detection with effective SDLC integration and is known for its user-friendly interface and seamless security integration.

HCL AppScan provides dynamic and static scanning to identify vulnerabilities like XSS and SQL injection. It integrates well into CI/CD pipelines, supports multiple languages, and offers web and dynamic scanning, helping businesses ensure security across development lifecycles. Users benefit from API coverage, Postman integration, and its ability to function in cloud and on-premise environments, facilitating a shift from DevOps to DevSecOps practices.

What features define HCL AppScan?

User-friendly interface: Simplifies navigation and usage.
Vulnerability detection: Quickly identifies issues like XSS and SQL injection.
Integration with SDLC: Seamlessly blends with development processes.
Dynamic scanning: Offers comprehensive security evaluations.
Multiple language support: Supports diverse programming environments.

What benefits should users consider?

Scalability: Adapts to growing needs and projects.
Low false-positive rates: Delivers accurate and reliable results.
Detailed reporting: Provides comprehensive vulnerability insights.
Effective integration: Enhances CI/CD pipeline security.

HCL AppScan is leveraged in sectors requiring rigorous security checks, such as finance and healthcare, where it conducts comprehensive scans and offers insights into potential vulnerabilities. Its robust scanning capabilities aid companies in maintaining compliance and security standards.

HCLSoftware

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing offers robust scalability, ease of use, and high accuracy in scanning, making it a valuable tool for enterprises.

This security testing platform is known for its centralized dashboard, guided scans, and comprehensive reporting. It integrates seamlessly with tools like Fortify code scanner and supports extensive vulnerability detection and analysis, enhancing efficiency in security management. Despite its strengths, users suggest improvements in cloud integration, cost-effectiveness, and installation processes. Faster scans, reduced false positives, and improved mobile testing features are also desired.

What are the key features of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing?

Scalability: Easily adapts to changing enterprise needs.
Ease of Use: User-friendly interface with guided scans.
Comprehensive Reporting: Detailed vulnerability analysis and reporting.
Integration Capabilities: Works with Fortify code scanner and user authentication scanning.
Wide Vulnerability Detection: Identifies extensive security vulnerabilities.

What benefits should users expect from reviews?

Efficient Vulnerability Management: Streamlines security management in development environments.
Detailed Analysis: Provides in-depth insights into security issues.
Quick Setup: Easy to deploy within existing systems.
Enterprise Preference: Supports enterprise environments efficiently.

In industries like BFSI, OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is employed for performance network application testing, dynamic and static application security testing, and code checks. Security and QA teams use it in development processes to ensure application security prior to release, proving integral in both enterprise and testing environments.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT

Aaron's

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

June 2026

Free Report: HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Find out what your peers are saying about HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our HCL AppScan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report.

See our list of best Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) vendors.

We monitor all Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) 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.