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

Onapsis vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

 

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

Onapsis
Ranking in Application Security Tools
35th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Onapsis is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.2%, down from 4.3% 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%
Onapsis0.9%
Other95.9%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

it_user19113 - PeerSpot reviewer
SAP Security Consulting Engineer at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
It checks for and reports vulnerabilities on all SAP systems at the OS, DB and SAP levels.
I really love how Onapsis X1 is able to check SAP for threats; the reporting was something I felt could be improved. It could be a little easier to use and to publish for consumption with a larger audience. Currently, it takes some background jobs and additional work to get them published. It was difficult to get interactive reports to the different levels of the business. I would have to download them and send them out, or save them on my SharePoint site and send out a weekly link. In the version of the product I was usingת I had to log into the X1 system directly to get to the reports. Reporting would be used by several different areas of the organizationת many of whom would be at the director and executive levels. It would not make sense to have them log directly into the tool to look at these reports. Add to this that there was only one ID that could be used to log in and view the reports. To solve this problemת I had to run all of the different reports; executive summary down to detailed analysis and then export them out to my security team SharePoint site. To automate this processת a batch script was created to run after the X1 analyzed the systems. The script would pull the reports and place them in the SharePoint site automatically, but it was a bit of a hassle to get set up.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has hardened our SAP system by providing details of vulnerabilities in our SAP landscape."
"The features I found most valuable is that it is very configurable and the installation was also very easy."
"This identification provides us an advantage in that the service itself works to stay abreast and knowledgeable about emerging threats."
"What is most useful is how you can have related features upgraded on the tools."
"Being able to reduce risk overall is a very valuable feature for us."
"The most valuable feature is that it connects with your development platforms, such as Microsoft Information Server and Jira."
"Audit workbench: for on-the-fly defect auditing."
"It's a stable and scalable solution."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
 

Cons

"Reporting was something I felt could be improved. It could be a little easier to use and to publish for consumption with a larger audience."
"It does scanning for all virtual machines and other things, but it doesn't do the scanning for containers. It currently lacks the ability to do the scanning on containers. We're asking their product management team to expand this capability to containers."
"I would advise others not to use Fortify, but rather get something like Veracode or Checkmarx."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the user interface by making it more user-friendly."
"Primarily for a complex, advanced website, they don't really understand some of the functionalities. So for instance, they could tell us that there is a vulnerability because somebody could possibly do something, but they don't really understand the code to realize that we actually negate that vulnerability through some other mechanism in the program. In addition, the technical support is just not there. We have open tickets. They don't respond. Even if they respond, we're not seeing eye to eye. As the company got sold and bought, the support got worse."
"The technical support is actually a problem that needs to be addressed. Since the acquisition and merger with Hewlett Packard, it has been really hard to know who the technical or salesperson to talk to."
"Not fully integrated with CIT processes."
"There's a bit of a learning curve. Our development team is struggling with following the rules and following the new processes."
"The biggest deficiency is the integration with bug tracker systems. It might be better if the configuration screen presented for accessing the bug tracking systems could provide some flexibility."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Despite being on the higher end in terms of cost, the biggest value lies in its abilities, including robust features, seamless integration, and high-quality findings."
"We are still using the trial version at this point but I can already see from the trial version alone that it is a good product. For others, I would say that Fortify on Demand might look expensive at the beginning, but it is very powerful and so you shouldn't be put off by the price."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."
"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."
"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."
"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."
"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."
"Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Energy/Utilities Company
16%
Construction Company
13%
University
13%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
7%
Construction 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...
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...
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 ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sony, US Army, Westinghouse, AXA. Galicia, Daimler, Roche, Levi's, Siemens, ABB, KPMG, Mercardo Libre, Verizon, Bacardi, Adgas, Sicpa, Whirlpool, Leaseplan
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.