Acunetix vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Invicti and OpenText are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Invicti is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.4, while OpenText is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.0. Invicti holds a 2.5% mindshare in AS, compared to OpenText’s 3.9% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 33 Acunetix reviews

5,850 Views
2,808 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Application S...

Read 60 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

6,920 Views
5,121 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Acunetix

OpenText Core Application S...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

Acunetix and OpenText Core Application Security are competitors in the field of application security testing. Based on feature robustness and integration capabilities, OpenText Core Application Security appears to have the upper hand.

Features: Acunetix provides robust automated security testing featuring vulnerability scanning and an interactive application security testing module that enhances discovery of vulnerabilities. It includes a scheduling feature for scans and tailored attack parameterization. OpenText Core Application Security excels in application and source code scanning, dynamic testing, and its seamless integration within the DevOps cycle, which supports continuous security improvements.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix could improve its IAS tool, expand on OWASP Top Ten vulnerabilities, and make its advanced scan settings more user-friendly. It also faces challenges with false positives and report export functionality. OpenText Core Application Security requires enhancements in reducing false positives, speeding up dynamic scan capabilities, and offering better CI/CD tool integration alongside more comprehensive reporting options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix offers flexibility in deployment on-premises, in clouds, or hybrid setups but faces issues with slow customer support. OpenText Core Application Security also offers varied deployment options but stands out slightly for more responsive and helpful customer service when reached, although still reliant on ticket systems.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix, once known for its value, now struggles with competitive pricing due to recent increases, making it less cost-effective, although ROI remains satisfactory for some. OpenText Core Application Security, while moderately priced, is valued for its feature-rich offering and integration capabilities, reflecting its strong ROI in security posture improvements rather than direct cost savings.

To learn more, read our detailed Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 872,778 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

Acunetix

Ranking in Application Security Tools

16th

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

12th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Vulnerability Management (23rd), DevSecOps (6th)

OpenText Core Application S...

Ranking in Application Security Tools

14th

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

13th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.5%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.9%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Core Application Security	3.9%
Acunetix	2.5%
Other	93.6%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil

CEO at Xcelliti

Has enabled teams to improve security testing with smooth integration and high accuracy

Acunetix has a very good ratio of fewer false positives, so users don't need to retest everything. Acunetix operates smoothly with no interruptions required, and it performs at 100% efficiency without issues in scanning anything. The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities. Acunetix integrates with every type of tool, including CI/CD tools, offering 100% integration in DevOps environments. The main benefit of Acunetix is that at the first level, users can address security issues related to penetration testing, allowing them to expose vulnerabilities and ensure all required testing is completed with very few false positives.

Read full review

Jonathan Steyn

Principal Technical Consultant at EOH

Source code analyzer, FPR file generation, reduction of false positives and generates compliance reports, for in-depth analysis

Not challenges with the product itself. The product is very reliable. It does have a steep learning curve. But, again, one thing that Fortify or OpenText does very well is training. There are a lot of free resources and training in the community forums, free training as well as commercial training where users can train on how to use the back-end systems and the scanning engines and how to use command-line arguments because some of the procedures or some of the tools do require a bit of a learning curve. That's the only challenge I've really seen for customers because you have to learn how to use the tool effectively. But Fortify has, in fact, improved its user interface and the way users engage the dashboards and the interfaces. It is intuitive. It's easy to understand. But in some regards, the cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions. But from the point of the reliability index and how powerful the tool is, there's no challenge there. But it's just from a learning perspective; users might need a bit more skill to use the tool. The user interface isn't that tedious. It's not that difficult to understand. When I initially learned how to use the interfaces, I was able to master it within a week and was able to use it quite effectively. So training is required. All skills are needed to learn how to use the tool. I would like to see more enhancements in the dashboards. Dashboards are available. They do need some configuration and settings. But I would like to see more business intelligence capabilities within the tool. It's not particularly a cybersecurity function, but, for instance, business impact analysis or other features where you can actually use business intelligence capabilities within your security tool. That would be remarkable because not only do you have a cybersecurity tool, but you also have a tool that can give you business impact analysis and some other measurements. A bit more intelligence in terms of that from a cybersecurity perspective would be remarkable.

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 most valuable feature of the solution is the speed at which it can scan multiple domains in just a few hours."

"It can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."

"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."

"The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code."

"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."

"The features of Acunetix have proved most effective in identifying vulnerabilities."

"The usability and overall scan results are good."

"Picks up weaknesses in our app setups."

More Acunetix pros

"I don’t know of any other On-Demand enterprise solution like this one where we can load the details and within a few days, receive the results of intrusion attacks, and work with HP Security Experts when needed for clarification"

"I do not remember any issues with stability."

"The solution is very fast."

"The user interface is good."

"The SAST feature is the most valuable."

"This product is top-notch solution and the technology is the best on the market."

"Fortify is effective in identifying such oversights, making it a really helpful tool despite its problems."

"The scanning capabilities, particularly for our repositories, have been invaluable."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

"I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection."

"The solution's pricing could be better."

"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."

"You can't actually change your password after you've set it unless you go back into the administration account and you change it there. Thus, if you're locked out and don't remember your password, that's a thing."

"It would be nice to have a feature to "retest" only a single vulnerability that the customer reports as patched, and delete it from the next scans since it has already been patched."

"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."

"It is difficult to create a proxy connection."

"Currently only supports web scanning."

More Acunetix cons

"It natively supports only a few languages. They can include support for more native languages. The response time from the support team can also be improved. They can maybe include video tutorials explaining the remediation process. The remediation process is sometimes not that clear. It would be helpful to have videos. Sometimes, the solution that the tool gives in the GUI is not straightforward to understand for the developer. At present, for any such issues, you have to create a ticket for the support team and request help from the support team."

"We have some stability issues, but they are minimal."

"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."

"In terms of what could be improved, we need more strategic analysis reports, not just for one specific application, but for the whole enterprise. In the next release, we need more reports and more analytic views for all the applications. There is no enterprise view in Fortify. I would like enterprise views and reports."

"Sometimes when we run a full scan, we have a bunch of issues in the code. We should not have any issues."

"Temenos's (T-24) info basic is a separate programming interface, and such proprietary platforms and programming interfaces were not easily supported by the out-of-the-box versions of Fortify."

"We want a user-based control and role-based access for developers. We want to give limited access to developers so that it only pertains to the code that they write and scanning of the codes for any vulnerabilities as they're progressing with writing the code. As of now, the interface to give restricted access to the developers is not the best. It gives them more access than what is basically required, but we don't want over-provisioning and over-access."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a bit expensive. If you need to check five applications, you have to pay almost 14,000. It is an agreement for two years at 7,000 per year for only five applications. You cannot change the applications in the license. So, you are stuck with the same license for the five applications for one full year."

"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."

"The solution is expensive."

"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."

"When compared with other products, the pricing is a little bit high. But it gives value for the price. It serves the purpose and is worthwhile for the price we pay."

"The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable."

"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."

"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"The pricing can be improved because it is complex when compared to the competition."

"Fortify on Demand is affordable, and its licensing comes with a year of support."

"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."

"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."

"It is not more expensive than other solutions, but the pricing is competitive."

"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."

"Buying a license would be feasible for regular use. For intermittent use, the cloud-based option can be used (Fortify on Demand)."

"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."

More OpenText Core Application Security pricing and cost advice

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

872,778 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

University

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	14

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	16
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	43

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

The primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner is automated scanning and detection of security vulnerabilities in web applications, websites, and APIs.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

Acunetix supports multi-user environments effectively. Acunetix is targeted for small to mid-size teams in a DevSecOps environment, making it the best choice for small and mid-size companies, offer...

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades.

See all answers

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?

There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify. One day it may pass a scan with no issues, and the next day, without any code changes, it will report vulnerabilities such as passw...

See all answers

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 16% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 9% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 7% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 7% of the time

Veracode vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 15% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 13% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 9% of the time

Coverity Static vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 9% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 6% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

October 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Application Security

October 2025

OpenText Core Application Security report

Download OpenText Core Application Security product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand

Overview

Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner is an automated web application security testing tool that audits your web applications by checking for vulnerabilities like SQL Injection, Cross site scripting, and other exploitable vulnerabilities.

Invicti

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

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security

September 2025

Free Report: Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security

Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

872,778 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Acunetix vs. OpenText Core Application Security report.

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.