Acunetix vs Fortify Software Security Center comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Invicti and OpenText are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0, while OpenText is ranked #18 with an average rating of 9.0. Invicti holds a 2.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to OpenText’s 1.4% mindshare. Additionally, 89% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 36 Acunetix reviews

11,992 Views
6,236 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Fortify Software Security C...

Read 8 Fortify Software Security Center reviews

4,053 Views
3,891 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Acunetix

Fortify Software Security C...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Acunetix and Fortify Software Security Center are strong competitors in the software security solutions category. Acunetix leads in pricing and ease of deployment, while Fortify Software Security Center offers advanced functionality.

Features: Acunetix offers automated scanning capabilities that help detect vulnerabilities efficiently, making it suitable for web application security. Its simplicity in automation is a standout. Fortify Software Security Center focusses on comprehensive code analysis, providing broad coverage in identifying code vulnerabilities and offering detailed feedback.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix could enhance its reporting functionalities for richer insights and integrate more seamlessly with various tools. Users feel its scanning speed and update frequency may also need improvement. Fortify Software Security Center should work on improving integration with development tools to enhance workflow, refine their user interface to reduce complexity, and consider simpler initial setups.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix has straightforward deployment options that are user-friendly and is supported by responsive customer service. Fortify Software Security Center, despite its complex deployment requiring careful setup, benefits from knowledgeable support helping bridge these challenges effectively.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix is seen as cost-effective, offering competitive pricing and solid ROI, appealing to budget-conscious buyers. Fortify Software Security Center, while initially more expensive, is perceived to deliver higher ROI for users interested in comprehensive security, making the investment worthwhile.

To learn more, read our detailed Acunetix vs. Fortify Software Security Center Report (Updated: August 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. Fortify Software Security Center

August 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 911,952 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 Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

11th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (16th), Vulnerability Management (30th), DevSecOps (8th)

Fortify Software Security C...

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

18th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

4.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.5%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortify Software Security Center is 1.4%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Acunetix	2.5%
Fortify Software Security Center	1.4%
Other	96.1%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Rahul Kumar

Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees

Identifies vulnerabilities across bulk web applications but needs better support and cleaner reports

The best feature Acunetix offers is the centralized dashboard and the quality of reports it generates, which includes various options for selecting reports and developer options for directly sharing the reports with developers. The centralized dashboard of Acunetix gives visibility into the security aspects of mass applications; for instance, with more than 200 applications, it provides a valuable overview of findings and necessary fixes, along with a high-level summary that helps us achieve compliance through monthly and sometimes weekly scanning. In terms of reporting, Acunetix is excellent because it can generate different types of reports, such as an executive summary report, detailed reports, and developer reports that can be shared directly with developers. Acunetix positively impacts my organization by helping identify outdated libraries and applications, including legacy applications vulnerable to old attacks based on OWASP Top 10, thus aiding in compliance checks for PCI DSS and OWASP. Acunetix provides a centralized report with compliance-related aspects and a vulnerability timeline, effectively helping reduce vulnerabilities and save time.

Read full review

Diego Caicedo Lescano

Chief Innovation Officer at SAGGA

Enables centralized analysis and improves governance through seamless tool integration

The main use case for Fortify Software Security Center is exceptional because we have governance and control through that console. You can centralize both static analysis and dynamic analysis, and correlate both analyses in one tool to get better results by combining those independent results from each solution. That is outstanding, and there is no tool I have seen on the market that offers these capabilities. I appreciate the interoperability with other solutions from Fortify Software Security Center. Because we are using Kiuwan, you can run Kiuwan analyses and integrate them with Fortify Software Security Center to get those results in a single console. That is a good console for centralizing things in one point. That is one of the best features of the on-premises Fortify.

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

"Overall, it's a very good tool and a very good engine."

"I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."

"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."

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

"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."

"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."

"Segregation of reports is really, really good with Acunetix; it provides us with a lot of in-depth details."

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

More Acunetix pros

"It's very important because they want to scan their source code every day, so we provide CICD integration to our customers so they can auto build and auto test every day, get reports, and fix issues."

"The reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."

"The main use case for Fortify Software Security Center is exceptional because we have governance and control through that console."

"This is a stable solution at the end of the day."

"The overall rating for this tool is ten out of ten."

"Software Security Center is highly customizable and helps me test all vulnerability data against the latest conventions like OWASP Top Ten, CVE Top twenty-five, and several other legal compliances."

"Fortify Analytics' AI function helps scan and provides more detailed explanations and recommendations about vulnerabilities."

"I like the explanation of issues provided by Fortify Software Security Center."

More Fortify Software Security Center pros

Cons

"However, it doesn't seem very helpful or useful for scanning web services, and that has what I feel that the organization could work better on that."

"One of the biggest problems I've had with Acunetix is that it's hard to replicate things manually because you don't get the raw packet."

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

"In terms of additional features, we are currently missing some tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."

"There's a clear need for a reduction in pricing to make the service more accessible."

"We have had issues during upgrades where their scans worked on some apps better with previous versions. Then, we had to work with their tech support, who were great, to get it fixed for the next version."

"I believe Acunetix can improve customer support, as the dedicated support staff are often unfamiliar with problems and troubleshooting, leading to communication gaps that delay issue resolution."

"Acunetix needs to be dynamic with JavaScript code, unlike Netsparker which can scan complex agents."

More Acunetix cons

"The product's overlap feature is restrictive and requires more customization efforts, which can be expensive."

"The initial setup of this solution is very complex. Specifically, the integration between other parts of the solution is difficult."

"This solution is difficult to implement, and it should be made more comfortable for the end-users."

"We are having issues with false positives that need to be resolved."

"The support for Fortify on-premises is the same as for the other products. I would say the support is not good and I would rate it a three out of ten."

"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."

"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."

"I am not satisfied with the percentage of false positives, which is around eighteen percent."

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."

"The price is exceptionally high."

"When we looked at all other vendors and what they were asking for, to provide a third of what Acunetix was capable of doing, it was an easy decision... But now that it's coming to a cost where it's line with market value, it becomes more of a competition... Acunetix is raising the cost of licensing. It's 3.5 times what we were initially quoted."

"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."

"The solution is expensive."

"Implementing Acunetix needs a medium or larger business agency, because you need some money to get Acunetix. It is costly, but if you care about your agency's security, then maybe it's a cost that might help you in the future."

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

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"As a Fortify partner company providing technical support, I find the product expensive in our country, where local, inexpensive products are available."

"This is a costly solution that could be cheaper."

"The solution is priced fair."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

911,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	18
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	19

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	3

Questions from the Community

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

In a typical enterprise environment, Acunetix is mainly used for visibility, detection, and investigation across network traffic. The main use cases usually fall into a few core areas, with primary...

See all answers

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

I advise that Acunetix is the best option. Invest time in proper initial configuration and scope definitions. The tool is powerful, but its effectiveness depends heavily on how the authenticated ar...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Acunetix?

Everything is perfect and good, including the pricing and all related aspects.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Software Security Center?

The pricing for the on-premises Fortify is expensive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Software Security Center?

In my opinion, there are no areas that could be improved with Fortify Software Security Center. I would say it is a good product and a mature product. However, the SAST has many improvement areas. ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Software Security Center?

We have installed Fortify Static Code Analysis, SAST, in Ecuador in two customers. The Fortify ScanCentral includes three components: SAST, Fortify Software Security Center, and the WebInspect.

See all answers

Comparisons

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Acunetix

Compared 4% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 4% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

Checkmarx One vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 20% of the time

Checkmarx IaC Security / KICS vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

Coverity Static vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 3% of the time

More Fortify Software Security Center Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

August 2026

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

August 2026

Download Fortify Software Security Center product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

Micro Focus Software Security Center, Application Security Center, HPE Application Security Center, WebInspect

Overview

Acunetix is a dynamic application security tool used globally for web application vulnerability scanning, focusing on SQL injection and cross-site scripting.

Acunetix provides a comprehensive web vulnerability assessment platform designed for identifying and remediating security threats. Users benefit from its ability to schedule scans, boasting a fast detection rate for common vulnerabilities. The tool's centralized dashboard helps organizations with compliance monitoring and features such as crawling and login sequence enhancements, contributing depth to its security assessments. Despite high praise for its integration capabilities and automated scanning that saves time, pricing and false positives present challenges. Organizations often use Acunetix to maintain internal security and evaluate pre-release environments.

What are Acunetix's main features?

Comprehensive Reporting: Detailed reports assist in security analysis and compliance audits.
User-Friendly Interface: Simple navigation enhances user experience.
Scheduled Scans: Automation of scans allows for continuous monitoring.
Fast Detection: Quickly identifies vulnerabilities like SQL injection and cross-site scripting.
Integration Capabilities: Scalable solutions with compatibility across applications.
Crawling & Login Sequence: Improves depth in security analysis.

What benefits should businesses look for in reviews?

Low False Positive Rate: Accurate vulnerability detection saves time in analysis.
Time Efficiency: Automated scans reduce manual workload, improving team productivity.
Scalability: Integration features help accommodate growth and complexity.
Compliance Support: Centralized dashboard supports regulatory compliance checks.

In industries like finance, healthcare, and technology, Acunetix assists in protecting sensitive data through robust scanning and reporting capabilities. Its ability to perform dynamic assessments makes it a chosen tool in regulatory environments and development settings, offering both internal security inspections and pre-release evaluations.

Invicti

Fortify Software Security Center offers comprehensive application security through a centralized console that integrates static and dynamic analysis, making it essential for organizations focused on robust security operations.

Fortify Software Security Center delivers extensive capabilities that facilitate application security testing, code audits, and bug fixes. Its centralized console enhances governance and control, while its interoperability with tools like Kiuwan and Azure strengthens its functionality. The dashboard's intuitive data customization, along with the ability to store and report data on-premises, further complements its integration capabilities. Although improvements in dataset aggregation, integration with tools like Jira, and resolution of false positives are required, its ability to scan and analyze source code to identify security violations is acknowledged.

What are the key features of Fortify Software Security Center?

Centralized Console: Streamlines governance and control through combined static and dynamic analysis.
Interoperability: Enhances functionality with tools like Kiuwan for comprehensive testing.
Customizability: Tailors vulnerability testing to standards such as OWASP Top Ten.
Macro Recording: Facilitates multi-factor authentication processes.
CI/CD Integration: Ensures seamless integration with development workflows.
Collaboration Module: Supports teamwork with clarification on issues.
Daily Scanning: Elevates code quality through regular evaluations.

Why should users consider Fortify Software Security Center for ROI?

Code Quality Enhancement: Improves coding practices through continuous deployment and daily scanning.
Seamless Deployment: Enhances implementation success and mitigates security threats effectively.
Customization Flexibility: Offers tailored solutions for overlapping features despite increased costs.
Collaboration Efficiency: Boosts teamwork through detailed issue explanations and analysis.

Fortify Software Security Center is adopted in software-driven industries for its robust application security capabilities. Users in technology sectors rely on its static code analysis for auditing and security testing. Its on-premises deployment model and integration with platforms like Azure make it ideal for storing and reporting data, providing customization that aligns with industry standards.

OpenText

Sample Customers

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

Neosecure, Acxiom, Skandinavisk Data Center A/S, Parkeon

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. Fortify Software Security Center

August 2026

Free Report: Acunetix vs. Fortify Software Security Center

Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. Fortify Software Security Center and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

911,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Acunetix vs. Fortify Software Security Center report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.