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 881,346 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 tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."

"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."

"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."

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

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

"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."

"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

"The scanner and the result generator are valuable features for us."

"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."

"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."

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

"The platform is stable."

"When we try to manually exploit the vulnerabilities, it often takes time to realize what's going on and what needs to be done."

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

"The dashboard is really cool, and the features are really good. It tells you about the software version you're using in your web application. It gives you the entire technology stack, and that really helps. Both web and desktop apps are good in terms of application scanning. It has a lot of security checks that are easily customizable as per your requirements. It also has good customer support."

More Invicti pros

Cons

"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 false positive rate should be lower."

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

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

"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."

"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 security checks. Many independent and open-source tools are available, from Apache to various libraries. Using multiple DevOps pipeline tools can slow the turnaround time."

"The licensing can be a little complex."

More Fortify Application Defender cons

"The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker."

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

"The scannings are not sufficiently updated."

"The proxy review, the use report views, the current use tool and the subset requests need some improvement. It was hard to understand how to use them."

"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."

"They could enhance the support for data swap testing for the platform."

"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."

"The solution needs to make a more specific report."

More Invicti cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Fortify Application Defender is very expensive."

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."

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

"It is competitive in the security market."

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

881,346 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Government

Computer Software Company

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 15% of the time

SonarQube vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 9% of the time

Coverity Static vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 7% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 5% of the time

CAST Application Intelligence Platform vs Fortify Application Defender

Compared 5% of the time

More Fortify Application Defender Competitors

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 15% of the time

SonarQube vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

Rapid7 InsightAppSec 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