Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Bright vs HCL AppScan comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Bright
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
43rd
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
9th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
HCL AppScan
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
12th
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
1st
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Bright is 0.0%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HCL AppScan is 2.8%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Gladwin Christian - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 29, 2023
A useful tool to scan applications that can be easily installed
Given that we have been using HCL AppScan for many years, I think the setup process is not difficult at all. Sometimes, some issues stop or prevent my company from moving forward with the product's setup phase. We have to call HCL's support team and engage in long discussions to smoothly carry out the setup phase. In general, the product's setup phase is not difficult in our company. The solution is deployed on an on-premises model. The licenses for the solution are available only on cloud deployments nowadays. The solution is already installed in our environment. Every time a new release or software comes out from HCL, our company does a scan, which takes maybe a day or two.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The price is very expensive."
"HCL AppScan is expensive."
"The price of HCL AppScan is okay, in my opinion. You just buy HCL AppScan and don't pay anything anymore, meaning it is just a one-time purchase."
"AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."
"The tool was expensive."
"Pricing was the main reason that we went ahead with this solution as they were the lowest in the market."
"I would rate the product's pricing a nine out of ten. The product's pricing is expensive compared to the features that they offer."
"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
814,572 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about HCL AppScan?
The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase.
What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?
They could incorporate AI to enhance vulnerability detection and improve the product's reporting capabilities.
What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?
We use AppScan primarily for security testing and performance monitoring across our systems.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

NexPloit, NexDast
IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Britannica, Shufersal, Qualitest, PremFina, playtech, Phoenix
Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: October 2024.
814,572 professionals have used our research since 2012.