Acunetix vs Fortify Software Security Center comparison

Invicti and OpenText are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.5, while OpenText is ranked #19 with an average rating of 9.0. Invicti holds a 2.7% mindshare in SAST, compared to OpenText’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 37 Acunetix reviews

6,442 Views
3,994 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Fortify Software Security C...

Read 8 Fortify Software Security Center reviews

1,160 Views
1,102 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: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. Fortify Software Security Center

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 882,606 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)

8th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (11th), Vulnerability Management (19th), DevSecOps (6th)

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 February 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.7%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortify Software Security Center is 1.2%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Acunetix	2.7%
Fortify Software Security Center	1.2%
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

"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."

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

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

"It generates automated reports."

"We are able to create a report which shows the PCI DSS scoring and share it with the application teams. Then, they can correlate and see exactly what they need to fix, and why."

"By helping me patch vulnerabilities, Acunetix has led to measurable outcomes like time saved and fewer incidents."

"The usability and overall scan results are good."

"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."

More Acunetix pros

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More Fortify Software Security Center pros

Cons

"The jargon used makes it difficult for project managers to understand the issues, and the technical explanations used make it difficult for developers to understand issues. These things should be simplified much more. That would be very helpful for us when explaining to them what needs to be fixed. The report output needs to be simplified."

"In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us."

"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."

"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."

"We want to see how much bandwidth usage it consumes. When we monitor traffic we have issues with the consumption and throttling of the traffic."

"The solution's pricing could be better."

"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."

"Currently only supports web scanning."

More Acunetix cons

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

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

"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."

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

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

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

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

"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."

"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 solution is expensive."

"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."

"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."

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."

"The solution is priced fair."

"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

882,606 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Manufacturing Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	17

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

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?

I'm using Acunetix to automate security checks. Acunetix helped me catch common vulnerability issues early and improved the overall security posture of the application before development, specifica...

See all answers

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

I would advise anyone or any startup looking to engage in the security part to directly use Acunetix, as this will help in most aspects. I would rate this product a nine out of ten.

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 14% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 8% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 6% of the time

SonarQube vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

Checkmarx One vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 26% of the time

Checkmarx IaC Security / KICS vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 14% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 9% of the time

Coverity Static vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube vs Fortify Software Security Center

Compared 6% of the time

More Fortify Software Security Center Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

February 2026

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

February 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

February 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: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

882,606 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.