Acunetix vs Fortify Software Security Center comparison

Invicti and OpenText are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #9 with an average rating of 7.9, while OpenText is ranked #19 with an average rating of 9.0. Invicti holds a 2.6% mindshare in SAST, compared to OpenText’s 1.4% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 36 Acunetix reviews

7,596 Views
4,482 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Fortify Software Security C...

Read 8 Fortify Software Security Center reviews

1,593 Views
1,513 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: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. Fortify Software Security Center

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 886,510 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)

9th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (14th), Vulnerability Management (29th), DevSecOps (5th)

Fortify Software Security C...

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

19th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

4.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.6%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortify Software Security Center is 1.4%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Acunetix	2.6%
Fortify Software Security Center	1.4%
Other	96.0%

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

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

"The automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment."

"By integrating with CI/CD tools, it enables a shift-left approach in the development process."

"The scalability is good. The scalability is more than good because it can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated as part of applications. So that really makes it a very, very versatile solution to have."

"The solution is paying for itself, as our applications are more secure."

"Acunetix is the best service in the world. It is easy to manage. It gives a lot of information to the users to see and identify problems in their site or applications. It works very well."

"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."

"If an organization has 100 plus applications and wants to use an automated scanner, they should definitely go ahead with Acunetix because it is very cost-effective and will save time compared to focusing on other solutions and performing manual security assessments."

More Acunetix pros

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

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

"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."

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

"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."

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

"You can easily download the tool's rule packs and update them."

More Fortify Software Security Center pros

Cons

"It should be easier to recreate something manually, with the manual tool, because Acunetix is an automatic tool. If it finds something, it should be easier to manually replicate it. Sometimes you don't get the raw data from the input and output, so that could be improved."

"Acunetix provides the benefit of saving time for an end user. I would not say it saves money because the cost and license of Acunetix is far more than what others offer."

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

"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."

"The only problem that they have is the price. It is a bit expensive, and you cannot change the number of applications for the whole year."

"Acunetix needs to improve its cost."

More Acunetix cons

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

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

"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."

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

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

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

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

More Fortify Software Security Center cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."

"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."

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

"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."

"The price is exceptionally high."

"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."

"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 solution is expensive."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"The solution is priced fair."

"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."

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

886,510 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Manufacturing Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	18

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?

My main use of Acunetix is to scan my web application. I mostly deal with web applications and with Acunetix Network Security Component, but I have not activated the network component before and wi...

See all answers

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

I am still working with Acunetix, and we have even moved to their new platform, Invicti. I have requested a demo for Acunetix DeepScan technology, but I have yet to go through DeepScan. That was th...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Acunetix?

I would say the pricing is average, but still, it is higher than low.

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

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 9% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 7% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 4% of the time

Veracode vs Acunetix

Compared 4% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

Checkmarx One vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 23% of the time

Checkmarx IaC Security / KICS vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 12% of the time

SonarQube vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

GitHub Code Scanning vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 4% of the time

More Fortify Software Security Center Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

April 2026

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

March 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 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

Software Security Center enables management, development, and security teams to work together to triage, track, validate, automate, and manage software security activities.

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

April 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: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

886,510 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.