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

Fortify Application Defender vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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
Ranking in Application Security Tools
32nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (6th), Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Fortify Application Defender is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 2.0%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HisaoOgata - PeerSpot reviewer
Saves time and warns about the vulnerabilities in the software, but the false positive rate should be lower
We use the solution to prevent cyberattacks Based on the alerts created by the solution during development, we modify the software we are developing. The product finds mistakes automatically. It warns us about the vulnerabilities in the software. The product saves us cost and time. The product…
Anuradha.Kapoor Kapoor - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers efficient scanning of entire websites but presence of false positive bugs, leading to time-consuming efforts in distinguishing real bugs from false alarms
We have found that so many times, false positive bugs are there, and then we spend a lot of time basically separating them from real bugs. So that's the reason we are looking for some other tool. So we were in discussion with Acunetix. Therefore, the false positive rate is, like, something that we would like to improve. What we are looking for is if this false positive rate goes down because we were OWASP Zap tool users, which was free anyway. But there were a lot of false positives there, and we used to spend a lot of time, like, for security reasons, reproducing those bugs for the development team to fix it. So then we thought, okay, why not we go with the tool? Even if it is not very expensive. But still, every year, we have to renew the license. And we got this tool. Again, we found that in this tool also, even if it is less, there are still a lot of false positive bugs out there. So we again have to spend so much time. So we hired a security tester, who was basically using Acunetix in his previous company for almost three years, and then you said that in that scanning is very slow. The scanning is also slow. Like, sometimes the site scan takes eight hours, six to eight hours. Yeah. And whereas in Acunetix, it took three to four hours. And plus, there are no false positives. I'm not saying none but there's very little. But here, the rate sometimes is very high. These are the two features I think we would like to improve further.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"The information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy."
"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."
"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"One useful function is the ability to send requests to the repeater without making actual requests through the browser, allowing me to modify requests easily."
"The automated scan is what I find most useful because a lot of customers will need it. Not every domain will be looking for complete security, they just need a stamp on the security key. For these kinds of customers, the scan works really well."
"The solution has a pretty simple setup."
"This tool is more accurate than the other solutions that we use, and reports fewer false positives."
"The solution scans web applications and supports APIs, which are the main features I really like."
"You can download different plugins if you don't have them in the standard edition."
"I have found this solution has more plugins than other competitors which is a benefit. You are able to attach different plugins to the security scan to add features. For example, you can check to see if there are any payment systems that exist on a server, or username and password brute force analysis."
"We are mostly using it for scanning the entire website. So, we basically create a script with the entire website and then run it for different injections."
 

Cons

"The solution is quite expensive."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"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 gives a lot of false positives."
"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"One thing that is not up to the mark in PortSwigger is web application testing. I found some issues with its performance and reporting. They should work on these and give us a better outcome."
"It would be beneficial to have privileged access management as a part of Burp Suite Professional."
"Sometimes the solution can run a little slow."
"There is a lot to this product, and it would be good if when you purchase the tool, they can provide us with a more extensive user manual."
"Improvement should be done as per the requirements of customers."
"The vendor must provide documentation on how to use the new API feature."
"There should be a heads up display like the one available in OWASP Zap."
"There were a lot of false positives there, and we used to spend a lot of time, like, for security reasons, reproducing those bugs for the development team to fix it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 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."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive."
"We have one license. The price is very nominal."
"For a country such as Sri Lanka, the pricing is not reasonable."
"At $400 or $500 per license paid annually, it is a very cheap tool."
"Burp Suite is affordable."
"There are multiple versions available of PortSwigger Burp Suite, such as enterprise, commercial, professional, and beginners."
"This solution requires a license. It is expensive but you receive a lot of functionality for the price."
"Pricing is not very high. It was around $200."
"The pricing of the solution is reasonable. We only need to pay for the annual subscription. I rate the pricing five out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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.
Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
What do you like most about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The solution helped us discover vulnerabilities in our applications.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
I find the price of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional to be very cost-efficient.
 

Also Known As

HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender
Burp
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ServiceMaster, Saltworks, SAP
Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify Application Defender vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.