Fortify Application Defender vs Invicti comparison

Fortify Application Defender

Read 31 Invicti reviews

3,137 Views
690 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Invicti and Fortify Application Defender are two leading solutions in the application security category. Invicti generally receives higher praise for its pricing and customer support, while Fortify is often favored for its comprehensive feature set, indicating strong value for money.

Features: Invicti provides comprehensive scanning, ease of integration, and user-friendly navigation. Fortify Application Defender offers advanced threat defense, real-time monitoring, and extensive security features appealing to complex business needs.

Room for Improvement: Invicti users suggest enhancements in vulnerability management, more robust reporting features, and smoother integration with existing systems. Fortify users point to a need for simpler configuration, better false-positive filtering, and a more intuitive user interface.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Invicti is known for its straightforward deployment process, favored by organizations for its quick implementation. Fortify Application Defender requires a more involved deployment due to its advanced capabilities, but both products benefit from effective customer service support.

Pricing and ROI: Invicti is recognized for cost-effectiveness and quick time-to-value, making it attractive to budget-conscious buyers. Fortify Application Defender, despite higher initial setup costs, offers significant long-term ROI for enterprises prioritizing comprehensive security features.

To learn more, read our detailed Fortify Application Defender vs. Invicti Report (Updated: October 2024).

Fortify Application Defender vs. Invicti

October 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 880,745 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

Fortify Application Defender

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (24th)

Invicti

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (11th), Container Security (25th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (8th), API Security (9th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (5th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (5th)

Mindshare comparison

Fortify Application Defender and Invicti aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Fortify Application Defender is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.1%, up 0.7% compared to last year.
Invicti, on the other hand, focuses on Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), holds 7.9% mindshare, up 5.3% since last year.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Fortify Application Defender	1.1%
SonarQube	17.9%
Checkmarx One	10.2%
Other	70.8%

Application Security Tools

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Invicti	7.9%
Veracode	19.4%
Checkmarx One	17.2%
Other	55.5%

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

Featured Reviews

VinothSivam

CTO at Abcl

Useful for fast code review in devOps pipelines

I rate the tool's scalability a seven out of ten. However, I'm concerned about how it handles an increasing number of lines of code. As the complexity grows, so does the time it takes for the tool to review everything. I want more clarity on how Fortify Application Defender handles multiple threats. We have numerous endpoints, but the tool runs in our pipeline, meaning it operates in the cloud. All our code is configured there, and the tool runs integration testing, unit testing, user testing, and final production code tests. It's a day-to-day experience. It's utilized almost every day as part of our pipeline runs. Each team responsible for integration testing, human testing, user access testing, and preproduction testing runs it whenever they take a build.

Read full review

Valavan Sivgalingam

Senior Manager, Security Engineering at ESS

Dynamic testing regularly identifies web vulnerabilities and has strong false positive confirmations

It has good false positive confirmations, confirmed issues identification, and proof of exploit-related features as part of it. We use Invicti for these things in our portfolios. The solution includes Proof-Based Scanning technology. Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios. For both the API endpoints and web applications, we do regular testing on a monthly basis for all our releases. Invicti does a good job. The only concern is on the performance side, but other than that, we find it really helpful in identifying web vulnerabilities. A full scan takes more time based on your website and other factors, but for us, it takes more than two to three days. The scan performance can be improved upon. When we check with them, they discuss proof-based scanning and related aspects. However, there could be intermittent results that could help us.

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

"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."

"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."

"We are able to provide out customers with a secure application after development. They are no longer left wondering if they are vulnerable to different threats within the market following deployment."

"I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy."

"The product saves us cost and time."

"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."

"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."

More Fortify Application Defender pros

"I would rate the stability as ten out of ten."

"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."

"Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios."

"Netsparker has valuable features, including the ability to scan our website, an interactive approach, and security data integration."

"Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment."

"Scan, proxify the application, and then detailed report along with evidence and remediations to problems."

"I am impressed with Invictus’ proof-based scanning. The solution has reduced the incidence of false positive vulnerabilities. It has helped us reduce our time and focus on vulnerabilities."

"Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios."

More Invicti pros

Cons

"The licensing can be a little complex."

"The solution is quite expensive."

"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."

"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."

"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."

"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."

"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."

"The solution could improve the time it takes to scan. When comparing it to SonarQube it does it in minutes while in Fortify Application Defender it can take hours."

More Fortify Application Defender cons

"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."

"The license could be better. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license. It's a major hindrance that we are facing while scanning applications, and we have to be sure that the URLs are the same and not different so that we do not end up consuming another license for it. Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. The licensing is tied to the URL, and it's restricted. If you have a URL that you scanned once, like a website, you cannot retry that same license. If you are scanning the same website but in a different domain or different URL, you might end up paying for a second license. It would also be better if they provided proper support for multi-factor authentications. In the next release, I would like them to include good multi-factor authentication support."

"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times. This needs to be looked into."

"Reporting should be improved. The reporting options should be made better for end-users. Currently, it is possible, but it's not the best. Being able to choose what I want to see in my reports rather than being given prefixed information would make my life easier. I had to depend on the API for getting the content that I wanted. If they could fix the reporting feature to make it more comprehensive and user-friendly, it would help a lot of end-users. Everything else was good about this product."

"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."

"Asset scanning could be better. Once, it couldn't scan assets, and the issue was strange. The price doesn't fit the budget of small and medium-sized businesses."

"The support's response time could be faster since we are in different time zones."

"It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities."

More Invicti cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of this solution could be less expensive."

"The base licensing costs for the SaaS platform is about $900 USD per application, per year."

"The licensing is very complex, it's project based and can range from $10,000 to $200,000+ depending on the project type and size."

"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten. It comes as an annual cloud subscription. The tool's pricing is around 50 lakhs."

"Fortify Application Defender is very expensive."

"The product’s price is much higher than other tools."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"It is competitive in the security market."

"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."

"We are using an NFR license and I do not know the exact price of the NFR license. I think 20 FQDN for three years would cost around 35,000 US Dollars."

"Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license."

"Invicti is best suited for large enterprises. I don't think small and medium-sized businesses can afford it. Maintenance costs aren't that great."

"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."

"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Computer Software Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

17%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	8

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	13

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Fortify Application Defender?

I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy.

What needs improvement with Fortify Application Defender?

The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and...

What is your primary use case for Fortify Application Defender?

We use the solution for fast code review. It is integrated into our DevOps pipeline.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?

The setup cost is pretty competitive. For example, if you want to talk about the SAST license, it comes to about $150 or sometimes less than $100, depending on the conversion or the number of licen...

What needs improvement with Invicti?

At this time, there is nothing that comes to mind. However, most of the products in the market are pretty much neck-to-neck competitors. Speaking about it, there are a couple of factors which they ...

What is your primary use case for Invicti?

I have worked on a couple of products, specifically in web application security. I have worked on Invicti, and with respect to PAM, I have worked with BeyondTrust. I have not worked specifically fo...

Checkmarx One vs Fortify Application Defender

Comparisons

Compared 17% of the time

SonarQube vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 10% of the time

Coverity Static vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 7% of the time

Klocwork vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 6% of the time

CAST Application Intelligence Platform vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 6% of the time

More Fortify Application Defender Competitors

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 16% of the time

SonarQube vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

Rapid7 InsightAppSec vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

Product Reports

Application Security Tools

January 2026

Download Fortify Application Defender product report

Download Invicti product report

January 2026

Also Known As

HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender

Netsparker

Overview

Micro Focus Security Fortify Application Defender is a runtime application self-protection (RASP) solution that helps you manage and mitigate risk from homegrown or third-party applications. It provides centralized visibility into application use and abuse while protecting from software vulnerability exploits and other violations in real time.

OpenText

Invicti helps DevSecOps teams automate security tasks and save hundreds of hours each month by identifying web vulnerabilities that matter. Combining dynamic with interactive testing (DAST + IAST) and software composition analysis (SCA), Invicti scans every corner of an app to find what other tools miss with 99.98% accuracy, delivering on the promise of Zero Noise AppSec. Invicti helps discover all web assets — even ones that are lost, forgotten, or created by rogue departments. With an array of out-of-the-box integrations, DevSecOps teams can get ahead of their workloads to hit critical deadlines, improve processes, and communicate more effectively while reducing risk and hitting the ROI goals.

Sample Customers

ServiceMaster, Saltworks, SAP

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank