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

OWASP Zap vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

The compared OpenText and OWASP solutions aren't in the same category. OpenText is ranked #3 in DAST , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 17.7% mindshare in the category. OWASP is ranked #11 in SAST , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 4.5% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OWASP users who would recommend it.
OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Read 22 OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing reviews
  • 3,107 Views
  • 839 Comparison Views
83% willing to recommend
OWASP Zap
Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews
  • 7,876 Views
  • 7,167 Comparison Views
88% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive Summary
We performed a comparison between OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and OWASP Zap based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed OWASP Zap vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Report (Updated: May 2022).
Buyer's Guide
OWASP Zap vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
May 2022
Download the complete report
Helped 868,759 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

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd), DevSecOps (8th)
OWASP Zap
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is designed for Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) and holds a mindshare of 17.7%, down 21.6% compared to last year.
OWASP Zap, on the other hand, focuses on Static Application Security Testing (SAST), holds 4.5% mindshare, up 4.4% since last year.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing17.7%
HCL AppScan14.0%
Checkmarx One13.0%
Other55.3%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OWASP Zap4.5%
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube)19.7%
Checkmarx One10.0%
Other65.8%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Navin N - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective scanning of diverse file extensions with fast reporting and issue resolution
We develop software packages for clients, and these clients are mostly in the BFSI sector. The packages need to be scanned, and we engage Fortify WebInspect for this.  Customers typically perform their own application pen tests, but in some cases, we have engagements where customers want us to scan…
Read full review
Amit Beniwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Simplifies vulnerability discovery and has high quality support
There are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores. Sometimes, a vulnerability initially categorized as high severity may be reduced to medium or low over time after security patches are applied. This alignment with the present severity score and CVSS score could be improved.
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 accuracy of its scans is great."
"The solution's technical support was very helpful."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"The feature that has been most influential in identifying vulnerabilities is its ability to crawl the website, understand the structure, and analyze the network packets sent and received."
"The solution is easy to use."
"I'm sorry, but there is no review content provided to extract a quote from."
"It is easy to use, and its reporting is fairly simple."
More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing pros
"The vulnerabilities that it finds, because the primary goal is to secure applications and websites."
"OWASP is quite matured in identifying the vulnerabilities."
"The community edition updates services regularly. They add new vulnerabilities into the scanning list."
"The most valuable feature is scanning the URL to drill down all the different sites."
"We use the solution for security testing."
"Automatic scanning is a valuable feature and very easy to use."
"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."
"It has evolved over the years and recently in the last year they have added, HUD (Heads Up Display)."
More OWASP Zap pros
 

Cons

"Fortify WebInspect's shortcoming stems from the fact that it is a very expensive product in Korea, which makes it difficult for its potential customers to introduce the product in their IT environment."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"The initial setup was complex."
"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."
"Fortify WebInspect could improve user-friendliness. Additionally, it is very bulky to use."
"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."
More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing cons
"Too many false positives; test reports could be improved."
"Online documentation can be improved to utilize all features of ZAP and API methods to make use in automation."
"There isn't too much information about it online."
"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."
"As security evolves, we would like DevOps built into it. As of now, Zap does not provide this."
"It needs more robust reporting tools."
"It would be ideal if I could try some pre-built deployment scenarios so that I don't have to worry about whether the configuration sector team is doing it right or wrong. That would be very helpful."
"The product reporting could be improved."
More OWASP Zap cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"The price is okay."
"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."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"This solution is very expensive."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."
"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."
"OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate."
"The tool is open-source."
"It's free and open, currently under the Apache 2 license. If ZAP does what you need it to do, selling a free solution is a very easy."
"It is open source, and we can scan freely."
"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."
"This solution is open source and free."
More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice
report
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
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise21
 

Questions from the Community

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?
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...
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
Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
See all answers
What do you like most about OWASP Zap?
The best feature is the Zap HUD (Heads Up Display) because the customers can use the website normally. If we scan websites with automatic scanning, and the website has a web application firewall, i...
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OWASP Zap?
OWASP might be cost-effective, however, people prefer to use the free edition available as open source.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Logo
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
Compared 18% of the time
Veracode vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Logo
Veracode vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
Compared 9% of the time
HCL AppScan vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Logo
HCL AppScan vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
Compared 8% of the time
Acunetix vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Logo
Acunetix vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
Compared 8% of the time
Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Logo
Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
Compared 7% of the time
More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Competitors
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OWASP Zap Logo
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OWASP Zap
Compared 18% of the time
Acunetix vs OWASP Zap Logo
Acunetix vs OWASP Zap
Compared 15% of the time
Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap Logo
Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap
Compared 11% of the time
Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap Logo
Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap
Compared 9% of the time
OpenText Core Application Security vs OWASP Zap Logo
OpenText Core Application Security vs OWASP Zap
Compared 4% of the time
More OWASP Zap Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
September 2025
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing reportDownload OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing product report
Buyer's Guide
OWASP Zap
September 2025
OWASP Zap reportDownload OWASP Zap product report
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
No data available
 

Overview

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

OWASP Zap is a free and open-source web application security scanner. 

The solution helps developers identify vulnerabilities in their web applications by actively scanning for common security issues. 

With its user-friendly interface and powerful features, Zap is a popular choice among developers for ensuring the security of their web applications.

OWASP
 

Sample Customers

Aaron's
1. Google 2. Microsoft 3. IBM 4. Amazon 5. Facebook 6. Twitter 7. LinkedIn 8. Netflix 9. Adobe 10. PayPal 11. Salesforce 12. Cisco 13. Oracle 14. Intel 15. HP 16. Dell 17. VMware 18. Symantec 19. McAfee 20. Citrix 21. Red Hat 22. Juniper Networks 23. SAP 24. Accenture 25. Deloitte 26. Ernst & Young 27. PwC 28. KPMG 29. Capgemini 30. Infosys 31. Wipro 32. TCS
Buyer's Guide
OWASP Zap vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
May 2022
Free Report: OWASP Zap vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: May 2022.
DOWNLOAD NOW
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our OWASP Zap vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report.

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.