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

Cequence Security vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

Cequence Security
Ranking in Application Security Tools
22nd
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Bot Management (8th), API Security (5th)
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Cequence Security is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.2%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Core Application Security3.2%
Cequence Security0.5%
Other96.3%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2395431 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technology Consultant at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Detect and mitigate attacks with API protection
Compliance with standards like those in Europe often requires ensuring that APIs adhere to OAuth and other security protocols. Many organizations need to verify that their APIs meet these compliance requirements. We can include information about where an API was first recorded and create a detailed chart. Some competitors already offer this feature. It is simple to integrate. Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.
Himanshu_Tyagi - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
Supports secure development pipelines and improves issue detection but limits internal visibility and needs broader dashboard integration
If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. That was the only reason we migrated from Fortify on Demand to another solution. Fortify has another tool which is Fortify WebInspect. On Demand is the outsourcing solution, and WebInspect you can use with your in-house team, which is basically the product developed by the Fortify team. For automated scanning, Fortify helps a lot. Regarding the visibility for the internal team, everyone is moving toward the DevSecOps side, and Fortify team has made good progress that you can integrate into your CICD pipeline. One thing I would highlight is if Fortify can focus more on the centralized dashboard of the tools because nowadays, tools such as SentinelOne also exist for identifying security issues, but they have a centralized dashboard that merges their cloud solution and application security side solution together. If you have one tool that works for different solutions, it helps a lot. They are doing good, but they should invest more on the AI side as well because AI security is evolving these days. On the cloud side, they have already made good progress, but I believe they should explore the new area related to AI security as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It uses machine learning algorithms to detect attacks and manage API inventory."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"What stands out to me is the user-friendliness of each feature."
"Fortify helps us to stay updated with the newest languages and versions coming out."
"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."
"The SAST feature is the most valuable."
"The most valuable features are the server, scanning, and it has helped identify issues with the security analysis."
"The solution is user-friendly. One feature I find very effective is the tool's automatic scanning capability. It scans replicas of the code developers write and automatically detects any vulnerabilities. The integration with CI/CD tools is also useful for plugins."
"The UL is easy to use compared to that of other tools, and it is highly reliable. The findings provide a lower number of false positives."
 

Cons

"It is expensive."
"Integration to CI/CD pipelines could be improved. The reporting format could be more user friendly so that it is easy to read."
"If you have a continuous integration in place, for example, and you want it to run along with your build and you want it to be fast, you're not going to get it. It adds to your development time."
"The solution has some issues with latency. Sometimes it takes a while to respond. This issue should be addressed."
"Not fully integrated with CIT processes."
"It lacks of some important features that the competitors have, such as Software Composition Analysis, full dead code detection, and Agile Alliance's Best Practices and Technical Debt."
".NET code scanning is still dependent on building the code base before running any scan. Also, it's dependent on an IDE such as Visual Studio."
"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."
"In terms of communication, they can integrate a few more third-party tools. It would be great if we can have more options for microservice communication. They can also improve the securability a bit more because security is one of the biggest aspects these days when you are using the cloud. Some more security features would be really helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."
"I'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."
"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."
"The product's cost depends on the type of license."
"Despite being on the higher end in terms of cost, the biggest value lies in its abilities, including robust features, seamless integration, and high-quality findings."
"The solution is a little expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
12%
Educational Organization
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise44
 

Questions from the Community

What is your primary use case for Cequence Security?
We use the solution to detect and mitigate attacks. It helps prevent them while also protecting APIs and effectively managing API inventory.
What advice do you have for others considering Cequence Security?
Compliance with standards like those in Europe often requires ensuring that APIs adhere to OAuth and other security protocols. Many organizations need to verify that their APIs meet these complianc...
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.
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...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. T...
 

Also Known As

Cequence ASP, Cequence Unified API Protection Platform
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

T-Mobile, Lbrands, Ulta Beauty
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: January 2026.
881,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.