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

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs StackHawk 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

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
3rd
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
DevSecOps (10th)
StackHawk
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
10th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 11.7%, up from 10.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of StackHawk is 1.8%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing11.7%
StackHawk1.8%
Other86.5%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Ney Roman - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Engineer at Deuna
Vulnerability visibility has improved across microservices but integration still needs refinement
StackHawk can be improved in the way that it is integrated, as at the very beginning, the idea was to, within the pipeline, mount the different resources that our microservices needed to start to run. For example, if we have a service that needed Redis, maybe Kafka, or a database to initialize, we did need to have a Docker Compose file, get up those services, and after that, do the analysis. It didn't have that; it wasn't reachable at the very beginning and it wasn't that good as we expected. But at some point, we decided to mount it as an agent in the Docker file, and it was waiting for new jobs. It was even better, and when we figured out how to integrate it within our EKS cluster, suddenly we started reaching to the services, knowing what was going on, and everything related to security. As long as we have a P2T to our QA site or cluster, we do not have garbage in our databases, but StackHawk does put a little information, a garbage information, doing their job. That's the main area I'm focusing on right now regarding needed improvements.

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 feature is the performance."
"It is scalable and very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"It is a good product, comparable to AppScan, quite scalable, and offers good cost/value with the support and backing from Micro Focus."
"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."
"Reporting, centralized dashboard, and bird's eye view of all vulnerabilities are the most valuable features."
"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities and is better at it than other products."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"StackHawk has positively impacted my organization by giving us a new vision of how vulnerabilities were seen, as we now have more visibility in that matter."
"StackHawk has positively impacted my organization by introducing an automated process that did not exist previously, and it helped the company achieve PCI certification."
 

Cons

"Not sufficiently compatible with some of our systems."
"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."
"This solution is very expensive."
"The initial setup was complex."
"A localized version, for example, in Korean would be a big improvement to this solution."
"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"StackHawk can be improved in the way that it is integrated, as at the very beginning, the idea was to, within the pipeline, mount the different resources that our microservices needed to start to run."
"On a scale of one to ten, I would rate StackHawk an eight, only because I wish the product was a little less expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The price is okay."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"This solution is very expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

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

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 ...
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...
What needs improvement with StackHawk?
StackHawk can be improved in the way that it is integrated, as at the very beginning, the idea was to, within the pipeline, mount the different resources that our microservices needed to start to r...
What is your primary use case for StackHawk?
My main use case for StackHawk is to analyze our application live in our EKS cluster. A specific example of how we use StackHawk in our EKS cluster is that we deployed an agent authenticated to the...
What advice do you have for others considering StackHawk?
I don't actually have a clear perspective on StackHawk's AI capabilities regarding its governance and security. My advice to others looking into using StackHawk is to stay prepared. Document how yo...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aaron's
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs. StackHawk and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.