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

Mend.io vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.7
Mend.io enhances ROI by automating security, improving efficiency, and integrating seamlessly into workflows, saving time and costs.
Sentiment score
3.7
OpenText Core Application Security enhances security by reducing bugs and attacks, offering cost-effective protection and improved efficiency.
Mend.io has provided a good return on investment by significantly reducing vulnerabilities.
CEO at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
There is definitive ROI if OpenText Core Application Security is deployed properly; it substantially reduces efforts in securing the solution while averting various application-related risks.
Co-Founder at Insecsys Technologies Private Limited
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.6
Mend.io customer service is proactive and responsive, praised for timely solutions, technical expertise, and efficient issue resolution.
Sentiment score
7.0
Customer service excels overall, but technical support is mixed, with room for improvement and a need for developer access.
They prioritize providing the best experience to large organizations like ours, belonging to the Fortune 100.
CEO at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
I have noticed that the speed to respond has decreased over time.
VP at a tech vendor with 5,001-10,000 employees
Mend.io provides pretty good support.
CEO at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Support tickets often stay open for one month to three months, which leads to customer frustration.
Chief Innovation Officer at SAGGA
I had direct interaction with them, which facilitated how we onboarded Fortify.
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
The technical support from OpenText is very good.
Co-Founder at Insecsys Technologies Private Limited
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
Mend.io scales seamlessly with organizational growth, integrating into workflows and DevOps tools, enhancing security and collaboration effortlessly.
Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText Core Application Security is scalable, integrates well, and efficiently handles diverse workloads, though pricing may be a concern.
If a customer wants to know the tools and the technology used for their application to scan their application, they provide less information on that.
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
OpenText Core Application Security is highly scalable; it is running on the cloud, and elasticity is one of the best points of a cloud environment.
Cloud Security Manager at T-Systems International GmbH
Fortify is superior to many solutions because of its scalability and that it does not require massive compute capabilities for its SAST and sandboxing features.
Co-Founder at Insecsys Technologies Private Limited
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Mend.io is stable with occasional slowdowns, recommended on Chrome/Firefox, and improved by ongoing enhancements and updates.
Sentiment score
8.7
OpenText Core Application Security is generally stable and reliable, with occasional memory and scanning issues noticed by users.
Mend.io is very stable; we did not have any issues.
CEO at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
AI integration in code security tools like Mend.io is still in its early stages and relatively immature.
CEO at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
OpenText Core Application Security is stable and has minimal downtime, benefitting from AWS cloud availability.
Co-Founder at Insecsys Technologies Private Limited
 

Room For Improvement

Mend.io users request better notifications, improved container scanning, clearer documentation, enhanced UI, flexible pricing, and reduced false positives.
OpenText Core Application Security needs better integration, user-friendliness, automation, and clearer pricing, while reducing false positives and scan times.
That's not a limitation of Mend.io; I think that's a general problem with any tool in the market because no tool in the market will actually know what portion of the code I'm actually using from that particular library if it is vulnerable or not.
CEO at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
The actual challenge is how easy it is to integrate it in the early phase of the software development life cycle.
Principal Architect at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
I strongly recommend that they start working with AI for the reporting part.
VP at a tech vendor with 5,001-10,000 employees
It would be beneficial if Fortify could check for CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) in third-party libraries, which I currently use a separate dependency checker tool for.
Lead Developer at a legal firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
One thing I would highlight is if Fortify can focus more on the centralized dashboard of the tools because nowadays, tools such as SentinelOne also exist for identifying security issues, but they have a centralized dashboard that merges their cloud solution and application security side solution together.
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
I would say OpenText Core Application Security is not very user-friendly in terms of price; it is quite high.
Co-Founder at Insecsys Technologies Private Limited
 

Setup Cost

Mend.io's pricing is seen as affordable and clear, yet varies by developer count, posing challenges for startups.
OpenText Core Application Security is seen as expensive with per-scan fees, user-based licensing, and no setup cost.
The cost of Mend.io is competitive, being quite low compared to others.
CEO at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
 

Valuable Features

Mend.io provides comprehensive vulnerability detection, license management, and integration tools to enhance security and decision-making practices effectively.
OpenText Core Application Security provides efficient vulnerability management and testing with seamless integration into DevOps pipelines and user-friendly features.
We find it 100% accurate in detecting vulnerabilities.
CEO at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
It handles Application Security, performing SCA SAST and container scanning.
Principal Architect at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
The features I find most valuable in Mend.io are the ease of use; it is very easy to access and integrate.
VP at a tech vendor with 5,001-10,000 employees
Fortify helps me find serious issues, such as developers inadvertently leaving access tokens, including API access tokens, in the source code.
Lead Developer at a legal firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
On demand you have two levels of reports: the first from the tool, which is the same as we can get from Fortify on-premises, and a next level reporting made by experts from OpenText, leading to a more condensed and precise report as level three.
Chief Innovation Officer at SAGGA
Additionally, you can integrate Fortify in CICD pipeline, so you get real-time updates about the security issues in your pipeline.
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
 

Categories and Ranking

Mend.io
Ranking in Application Security Tools
18th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (7th), Static Code Analysis (5th), Software Supply Chain Security (4th)
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
13th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Mend.io is 2.6%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.2%, down from 4.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security3.2%
Mend.io2.6%
Other94.2%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

meetharoon - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Centralized security monitoring has reduced false positives and improves dependency governance
The only area for improvement I would say is that the false positives are nearly zero; everything is mostly like 99 to 99.99% or we can say 100% accurate. There were a few areas for improvement just from the last time I saw; I think the user experience had a little problem. We wanted to have certain reports based on our kind of scenario, but the tool did not allow us to create custom reports. We had asked for some facility and some ability for us to create some custom reports. That would be awesome if they allow us to create custom reports the way we wanted. There is one small area which I don't know whether we should call a tool limitation or a wish list; if I use a library and I don't use all the capabilities of the library but only a portion of it and that portion is not vulnerable, but there is a component which is outdated, that is a problem, even though I don't use that component. Mend.io will discover there is a problem in the whole library; that is correct. That's a valid discovery, but in my case, for example, if I don't use that particular portion, then it actually is not making sense for me, but that's not a limitation of Mend.io; I think that's a general problem with any tool in the market because no tool in the market will actually know what portion of the code I'm actually using from that particular library if it is vulnerable or not.
Himanshu_Tyagi - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
Supports secure development pipelines and improves issue detection but limits internal visibility and needs broader dashboard integration
If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. That was the only reason we migrated from Fortify on Demand to another solution. Fortify has another tool which is Fortify WebInspect. On Demand is the outsourcing solution, and WebInspect you can use with your in-house team, which is basically the product developed by the Fortify team. For automated scanning, Fortify helps a lot. Regarding the visibility for the internal team, everyone is moving toward the DevSecOps side, and Fortify team has made good progress that you can integrate into your CICD pipeline. One thing I would highlight is if Fortify can focus more on the centralized dashboard of the tools because nowadays, tools such as SentinelOne also exist for identifying security issues, but they have a centralized dashboard that merges their cloud solution and application security side solution together. If you have one tool that works for different solutions, it helps a lot. They are doing good, but they should invest more on the AI side as well because AI security is evolving these days. On the cloud side, they have already made good progress, but I believe they should explore the new area related to AI security as well.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Energy/Utilities Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise20
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise45
 

Questions from the Community

How does WhiteSource compare with SonarQube?
Red Hat Ceph does well in simplifying storage integration by replacing the need for numerous storage solutions. This solution allows for multiple copies of replicated and coded pools to be kept, ea...
How does WhiteSource compare with Black Duck?
We researched Black Duck but ultimately chose WhiteSource when looking for an application security tool. WhiteSource is a software solution that enables agile open source security and license compl...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Mend.io?
Mend.io SCA offers a competitive pricing structure that is relatively affordable compared to similar solutions in the market. This makes it an attractive option for organizations looking to enhance...
What do you like most about Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
In comparison with other tools, they're competitive. It is not more expensive than other solutions, but their pricing is competitive. The licenses for Fortify On Demand are generally bought in unit...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. T...
 

Also Known As

WhiteSource, Mend SCA, Mend.io Supply Chain Defender, Mend SAST
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, Autodesk, NCR, Target, IBM, vodafone, Siemens, GE digital, KPMG, LivePerson, Jack Henry and Associates
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Mend.io vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.