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

NT OBJECTives NTOSpider [EOL] vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Rapid7 and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Additionally, 100% of Rapid7 users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 90% of OpenText users who would recommend it.
OpenText Core Application S...
Read 64 OpenText Core Application Security reviews
  • 10,911 Views
  • 8,074 Comparison Views
90% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

OpenText Core Application Security and NT OBJECTives NTOSpider [EOL] compete in the application security domain. OpenText is preferred for support and pricing, while NTOSpider [EOL] stands out for its comprehensive features.

Features: OpenText Core Application Security offers advanced vulnerability scanning, real-time threat detection, and strong security measures. NTOSpider [EOL] provides automated dynamic testing, broad attack simulation, and extensive testing capabilities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText provides an intuitive deployment process and proactive support, whereas NTOSpider [EOL] has a complex deployment with premium support packages for enhanced assistance.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Core presents competitive initial costs with substantial ROI through effective threat mitigation. NTOSpider [EOL] has higher setup costs but delivers value by potentially lowering long-term vulnerability expenses.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Application Security Tools Report (Updated: July 2026).
Buyer's Guide
Application Security Tools
July 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

NT OBJECTives NTOSpider [EOL]
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Core Application S...
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (11th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (9th)
 

Featured Reviews

it_user245400 - PeerSpot reviewer
it_user245400
Application Security Engineer at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
There were some incompatibility issues, but it's a fairly stable product.
The ability to exploit injection capabilities It has enabled me to develop a more comprehensive SDLC. The vulnerability mapping needs some work. I've been using it for one year alongside Rapid7. There were some incompatibility issues after a Windows update where the NTO consumed all the…
Read full review
Himanshu_Tyagi - PeerSpot reviewer
Himanshu_Tyagi
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.
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

"It has enabled me to develop a more comprehensive SDLC."
"While using Micro Focus Fortify on Demand we have been very happy with the results and findings."
"It is valuable in improving our overall security posture by catching significant errors."
"Fortify is effective in identifying such oversights, making it a really helpful tool despite its problems."
"Overall, it is a very good tool and it works well for what it is designed for."
"Secure code is an important part of our day-to-day development activities, so having code out there gives us some reasonable assurance that it is not vulnerable or open to attack, and it certainly makes our overall risk posture better."
"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."
"When choosing a software security product, we expect the product not only has the ability to find exploits, but also has educational and instructional capabilities related to exploits."
"The licensing was good."
More OpenText Core Application Security pros
 

Cons

"There were some incompatibility issues after a Windows update where the NTO consumed all the available RAM."
"The vulnerability analysis does not always provide guidelines for what the developer should do in order to correct the problem, which means that the code has to be manually inspected and understood."
"Fortify on Demand could be improved with support in Russia."
"I know OpenText is developing Aviator, similar to ChatGPT, with LLM inside the OpenText Core Application Security environment. However, I understand they do not have it for the on-premises environment."
"I would say OpenText Core Application Security is not very user-friendly in terms of price; it is quite high."
"They have a release coming out, which is full of new features. Based on their roadmap, there's nothing that I would suggest for them to put in it that they haven't already suggested. However, I am a customer, so I always think the pricing is something that could be improved. I am working with them on that, and they're very flexible. They work with their customers and kind of tailor the product to the customer's needs. So far, I am very happy with what they're able to provide. Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but that would be about it."
"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."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the reports. They could benefit from being more user-friendly and intuitive."
"The products must provide better integration with build tools."
More OpenText Core Application Security cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."
"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."
"Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."
"Buying a license would be feasible for regular use. For intermittent use, the cloud-based option can be used (Fortify on Demand)."
"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."
"The subscription model, on a per-scan basis, is a bit expensive. That's another reason we are not using it for all the apps."
"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."
More OpenText Core Application Security pricing and cost advice
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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...
See all answers
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
Areas for improvement should be contextualized post the OpenText acquisition, but back when I was working with Micro Focus, they focused heavily on enterprise-centric solutions. Now, after the acqu...
See all answers
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
For OpenText Core Application Security, I currently support a couple of my clients who are using Fortify on Demand for their web application, CRM, and sales platform. Many good features of Fortify ...
See all answers
 

Comparisons

No data available
SonarQube vs OpenText Core Application Security Logo
SonarQube vs OpenText Core Application Security
Compared 26% of the time
Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security Logo
Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security
Compared 6% of the time
GitHub vs OpenText Core Application Security Logo
GitHub vs OpenText Core Application Security
Compared 5% of the time
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Core Application Security Logo
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Core Application Security
Compared 4% of the time
Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security Logo
Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security
Compared 4% of the time
More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Application Security Tools
July 2026
NT OBJECTives NTOSpider [EOL] reportDownload NT OBJECTives NTOSpider [EOL] product report
Buyer's Guide
OpenText Core Application Security
July 2026
OpenText Core Application Security reportDownload OpenText Core Application Security product report
 

Also Known As

NTOSpider
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

While today's malicious attackers pursue a variety of goals, they share a preferred channel of attack - the millions of custom web, mobile, and cloud applications companies deploy to serve their customers. NTOSpider dynamically scans these applications for vulnerabilities across all modern technologies, provides tools that speed remediation and monitors applications for changes.
Rapid7

OpenText Core Application Security offers robust features like static and dynamic scanning, real-time vulnerability tracking, and seamless integration with development platforms, designed to enhance code security and reduce operational costs.

OpenText Core Application Security is a cloud-based, on-demand service providing accurate and deep scanning capabilities with detailed reporting. Its integrations with development platforms ensure an enhanced security layer in the development lifecycle, benefiting users by lowering operational costs and facilitating efficient remediation. The platform addresses needs for intuitive interfaces, API support, and comprehensive vulnerability assessments, helping improve code security and accelerate time-to-market. Despite its strengths, challenges exist around false positives, report clarity, and language support, alongside confusing pricing and package options. Enhancements are sought in areas like CI/CD pipeline configuration, report visualization, scan times, and integration with third-party tools such as GitLab, container scanning, and software composition analysis.

What features define OpenText Core Application Security?
  • Static and Dynamic Scanning: Offers thorough analysis to identify vulnerabilities during development.
  • Real-time Vulnerability Tracking: Continuously updates and monitors potential security threats.
  • Seamless Development Platform Integration: Enhances security processes without disrupting workflows.
  • Cloud-Based Service: Provides flexible, on-demand security capabilities with accurate results.
  • API Support: Allows smooth integration and automation within existing systems.
What benefits should users look for in reviews?
  • Reduced Operational Costs: Optimizes resources by lowering costs associated with security management.
  • Efficient Remediation: Speeds up the process of identifying and resolving vulnerabilities.
  • Enhanced Code Security: Strengthens overall application security during the development lifecycle.
  • Accelerated Time-to-Market: Streamlines development stages by integrating essential security tools.

Industries like mobile applications, e-commerce, and banking leverage OpenText Core Application Security for its ability to identify vulnerabilities such as SQL injections. Integrating seamlessly with DevSecOps and security auditing processes, this tool supports developers in writing safer code, ensuring secure application deployment and enhancing software assurance.

OpenText
 

Sample Customers

University of Salzburg, Chr. Hansen, American Chemical Society, North American Retail Chain, Wiltshire Council, Redner's Markets, Acosta Sales & Marketing
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Buyer's Guide
Application Security Tools
July 2026
Download Free Report
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: July 2026.
DOWNLOAD NOW
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.