No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

JFrog DevOps Cloud Platform vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

JFrog DevOps Cloud Platform
Ranking in DevSecOps
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Software Supply Chain Security (18th)
OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Ranking in DevSecOps
9th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the DevSecOps category, the mindshare of JFrog DevOps Cloud Platform is 3.7%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 6.6%, up from 5.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
DevSecOps Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing6.6%
JFrog DevOps Cloud Platform3.7%
Other89.7%
DevSecOps
 

Featured Reviews

Fredierick Saladas - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Lead at Standard Chartered Bank
Provides superior integration options and comprehensive reporting features
The product could benefit from enhanced integration capabilities with older software systems and more customizable reporting options. Improved support for mobile devices would also be advantageous, allowing team members to access the system more effectively while on the go. In the next release, we would like to see advanced analytics features, including predictive analytics to help forecast project outcomes. Additionally, a more robust mobile app with offline capabilities would be valuable for remote work scenarios.
AP
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features include task tracking and reporting capabilities."
"I appreciate the features in JFrog DevOps Cloud Platform, especially the efficient file management where downloads and uploads are optimized, saving time. The storage efficiency is also great as it avoids redundancy, which is crucial for our team. It is also quite easy to use, especially for basic commands through the command line. It's straightforward for us internally, and our data is well-hosted on their servers, which makes data location and querying fast and efficient. Moving our storage to JFrog has streamlined our development cycle by eliminating duplicated data, which previously took up extra space locally. This efficiency is crucial for our workflow, although network speeds still play a significant role in performance."
"They have a professional service team that works alongside their engineering and performance teams."
"Easy to scan and then share scan reports, it has definitely streamlined many processes."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."
"It is scalable and very easy to use."
"When we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities. Comparison is easy in SSC."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."
 

Cons

"We have encountered stability issues lately, particularly with frequent 500 internal server errors. Despite efforts from our DevOps team to adjust settings, these issues persist, affecting our workflow, especially with machine learning data uploads. Overall, while it's beneficial for storage and accessibility, stability issues need improvement for seamless operations. The occasional occurrence of internal server errors takes several minutes to resolve on their own and can disrupt workflows. Another concern is that sometimes files appear to be successfully uploaded, but then they cannot be downloaded, with no error message indicating the issue during the upload process. This inconsistency needs to be addressed by JFrog to ensure reliable functionality for users like us."
"Our locations are in different environments, so the remote server takes time to catch up, causing replication delays. The engineering team suggested that this issue would be resolved, but I'm not sure if it has been addressed yet. This is more of a feature enhancement that we suggested."
"The product could benefit from enhanced integration capabilities with older software systems and more customizable reporting options."
"We have often encountered scanning errors."
"The scanner could be better."
"This solution is very expensive."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
"The initial setup was complex."
"I want to enhance automation. Currently, Fortify WebInspect can scan and find vulnerabilities, but users with specific skills need to interpret the results and understand how to address them."
"We have had a problem with authentification."
"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product pricing is competitive but worth negotiating for volume discounts or longer-term contracts."
"Regarding pricing, I focus on the platform's interface and user communication rather than costs."
"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."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"This solution is very expensive."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"The price is okay."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which DevSecOps solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
31%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 ...
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
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 produ...
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...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Aaron's
Find out what your peers are saying about JFrog DevOps Cloud Platform vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.