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

OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs PyCharm comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 Static Application...
Ranking in Static Code Analysis
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
PyCharm
Ranking in Static Code Analysis
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Static Code Analysis category, the mindshare of OpenText Static Application Security Testing is 4.5%, down from 9.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PyCharm is 2.7%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Code Analysis Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
PyCharm2.7%
OpenText Static Application Security Testing4.5%
Other92.8%
Static Code Analysis
 

Featured Reviews

DK
Lead Information Security Analyst at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Focuses on detailed scans to find critical vulnerabilities while ensuring minimal false positives
I think Fortify Static Code Analyzer could be improved by updating the number of rule packs according to the latest vulnerabilities we find each year. We have updated to a version that is one less than the current latest version. It would be really helpful to include trending vulnerabilities and how to manage them. While it includes all the OWASP top factors, AI has come into the picture, so those updates should also be considered. I haven't thought much about additional features for improvement since I am using it daily. Most of our work revolves around scanning and providing the results, which sometimes feels like a crunch. However, I believe rule pack updates should be implemented. It feels easy to upgrade to the latest version as well.
Sahil Sanskar Jha - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant Manager at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Advanced machine learning workflows have become faster but still need better memory efficiency
In PyCharm, I find several components and libraries to be the most valuable. The support that Jupyter Notebook offers is essential, as we work through Jupyter regularly. Scientific libraries such as NumPy, Pandas, Matplotlib, and Plotly are integral to our work. Machine learning libraries including scikit-learn, PyTorch, and TensorFlow are used extensively. Hugging Face integration is particularly valuable because it is easily findable, the documentation is comprehensive, and it can be directly integrated with the IDEs we work with. The intelligent code editor in PyCharm definitely helps me manage code quality and efficiency in my projects. When using these libraries, it makes parallelization of data very efficient, allowing me to use multi-thread programming architecture. The code can work for multiple datasets rather than one at a time. With native Python code, a machine learning deployment taking 45 to 50 minutes to calculate can be efficiently reduced to a minute or half a second using these libraries.

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 features include its ability to detect vulnerabilities accurately and its integration with our CI/CD pipeline."
"The integration Subset core integration, using Jenkins is one of the good features."
"We are satisfied with this solution."
"I like the Fortify taxonomy as it provides us with a list of all of the vulnerabilities found, and Fortify releases updated rule packs quarterly, with accompanying documentation, that lets us know what new features are being released."
"Its flexibility is most valuable. It is such a flexible tool. It can be implemented in a number of ways. It can do anything you want it to do. It can be fully automated within a DevOps pipeline. It can also be used in an ad hoc, special test case scenario and anywhere in between."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer's most valuable features are its ability to provide best practices for fixing code and its examples and capabilities to address security problems in the code. It effectively identifies security vulnerabilities by analyzing the code and offering insights on improving it."
"We write software, and therefore, the most valuable aspect for us is basically the code analysis part."
"I recommend this product due to its good pricing, extensive language support, valuable features, and additional features like Fortify Academy."
"The solution has a great debugging feature."
"With native Python code, a machine learning deployment taking 45 to 50 minutes to calculate can be efficiently reduced to a minute or half a second using these libraries."
"The recent AI-powered code completion is pretty cool."
"The product's IDE feature is quite user-friendly."
"The solution provides a good comprehensive debugging feature that I like and which is easy to use."
"PyCharm is saving me time and money in general."
"The solution has a nice environment and extensions that make it easy to develop software."
"The automated package installation is helpful. I like the code highlighting features. A huge library of plugins is available, including AI coding tools, though I don't use those myself. The debugging tools are good, showing errors and problem lines."
 

Cons

"The generation of false positives should be reduced."
"Currently, we get four to five errors on the side of tagging, and it notifies you of every tiny inconsistency."
"False positives need improvement in the future. Fortify's vulnerability remediation guidance helps improve code security, but I think they need to improve the focus of the solution, as it still contains many bugs and needs a thorough review."
"The generation of false positives should be reduced."
"Fortify's software security center needs a design refresh."
"The deployment of Fortify Static Code Analyzer needs to be simplified."
"The pricing is a bit high."
"The pricing is a bit high. It would be nice if it was more competitive."
"They give some functionality to use Python Notebook, but it's not great."
"The breakpoints could be improved as they are not that intuitive to use."
"One issue with JetBrains tools, including PyCharm, is their heavy resource usage. They can be slow to start, especially when beginning a new project, as it takes some time to index."
"Customizing the tool can make it complicated."
"They should improve the product's interactiveness."
"Notebooks in PyCharm is not as intuitive as it could be."
"The navigation can be better."
"The solution does not support some features of OpenCV even though it is part of a PyCharm package."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"From our standpoint, we are significantly better off with Fortify due to the favorable pricing we secured five years ago."
"It has a couple of license models. The one that we use most frequently is called their flexible deployment. We use this one because it is flexible and based on the number of code-contributing developers in the organization. It includes almost everything in the Fortify suite for one developer price. It gives access to not just the secure code analyzer (SCA) but also to FSC, the secure code. It gives us accessibility to scan central, which is the decentralized scanning farm. It also gives us access to the software security center, which is the vulnerability management platform."
"The licensing is expensive and is in the 50K range."
"The setup costs and pricing for Fortify may vary depending on the organization's needs and requirements."
"I rate the pricing of Fortify Static Code Analyzer as a seven out of ten since it is a bit expensive."
"Although I am not responsible for the budget, Fortify SAST is expensive."
"There is a licensing fee, and if you bring them to the company and you want them to do the installation and the implementation in the beginning, there is a separate cost. Similarly, if you want consultation or training, there is a separate cost. I see it as suitable only for enterprises. I do not see it suitable for a small business or individual use."
"The price of Fortify Static Code Analyzer could be reduced."
"The community edition is free and the professional edition has a licensing fee."
"The community edition is free, which is good."
"They have a free Community edition, and they also have a licensed version. They definitely have an annual license. They probably also have a monthly license. Its pricing is good and reasonable. It is a little bit more expensive than the others, but it is well worth it. I would rate it a four out of five in terms of pricing."
"I don't have much info on the pricing, but I would say it is somewhat competitive."
"The price is reasonable."
"I use the free community version, so I'm saving money there."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Code Analysis solutions are best for your needs.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Government
7%
Outsourcing Company
21%
University
9%
Performing Arts
9%
Marketing Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise11
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify Static Code Analyzer?
My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing has been good. We have the scan machines, and we are planning to request more from Micro Focus now. We have calls every month or every oth...
What needs improvement with Fortify Static Code Analyzer?
I think Fortify Static Code Analyzer could be improved by updating the number of rule packs according to the latest vulnerabilities we find each year. We have updated to a version that is one less ...
What is your primary use case for Fortify Static Code Analyzer?
Our main use cases for Fortify Static Code Analyzer typically involve trying to figure out the critical vulnerabilities. It depends on the type of scans that we are doing, whether it is a release s...
What needs improvement with PyCharm?
A potential area of improvement in PyCharm at this point would be memory efficiency. PyCharm is based on its IntelliJ platform, which is Java-based, meaning it can be very memory-intensive, especia...
What is your primary use case for PyCharm?
My main use case for PyCharm is for machine learning operations.
What advice do you have for others considering PyCharm?
I use PyCharm's debugging tools on a case-by-case basis. The libraries are generally documented well enough that in most cases when I am debugging, half of the errors are found by the IDE initially...
 

Also Known As

Fortify Static Code Analysis SAST
No data available
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs. PyCharm and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.