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

Fortify on Demand vs HCL AppScan comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Fortify on Demand
Ranking in Application Security Tools
9th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
HCL AppScan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
15th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
13th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Fortify on Demand is 5.0%, up from 4.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HCL AppScan is 2.6%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Jonathan Steyn - PeerSpot reviewer
Source code analyzer, FPR file generation, reduction of false positives and generates compliance reports, for in-depth analysis
Not challenges with the product itself. The product is very reliable. It does have a steep learning curve. But, again, one thing that Fortify or OpenText does very well is training. There are a lot of free resources and training in the community forums, free training as well as commercial training where users can train on how to use the back-end systems and the scanning engines and how to use command-line arguments because some of the procedures or some of the tools do require a bit of a learning curve. That's the only challenge I've really seen for customers because you have to learn how to use the tool effectively. But Fortify has, in fact, improved its user interface and the way users engage the dashboards and the interfaces. It is intuitive. It's easy to understand. But in some regards, the cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions. But from the point of the reliability index and how powerful the tool is, there's no challenge there. But it's just from a learning perspective; users might need a bit more skill to use the tool. The user interface isn't that tedious. It's not that difficult to understand. When I initially learned how to use the interfaces, I was able to master it within a week and was able to use it quite effectively. So training is required. All skills are needed to learn how to use the tool. I would like to see more enhancements in the dashboards. Dashboards are available. They do need some configuration and settings. But I would like to see more business intelligence capabilities within the tool. It's not particularly a cybersecurity function, but, for instance, business impact analysis or other features where you can actually use business intelligence capabilities within your security tool. That would be remarkable because not only do you have a cybersecurity tool, but you also have a tool that can give you business impact analysis and some other measurements. A bit more intelligence in terms of that from a cybersecurity perspective would be remarkable.
AnshulTomar - PeerSpot reviewer
Scalable platform with efficient static and dynamic testing features
We use the product for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). By integrating AppScan into our CI/CD pipelines, aligned with Agile methodologies, we ensure that security testing becomes an integral part of the software development lifecycle The…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Speed and efficiency are great features."
"This product is top-notch solution and the technology is the best on the market."
"Each bank may have its own core banking applications with proprietary support for different programming languages. This makes Fortify particularly relevant and advantageous in those cases."
"The feature that I find the most useful is being able to just see the vulnerabilities online while checking the code and then checking suggestions for fixing them."
"It is an extremely robust, scalable, and stable solution."
"The installation was easy."
"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."
"The SAST feature is the most valuable."
"The solution is easy to use."
"We are now deploying less defects to production."
"There's extensive functionality with custom rules and a custom knowledge base."
"You can easily find particular features and functions through the UI."
"The UI was very intuitive."
"AppScan is stable."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase."
 

Cons

"During development, when our developer makes changes to their code, they typically use GitHub or GitLab to track those changes. However, proper integration between Fortify on Demand and GitHub and GitLab is not there yet. Improved integration would be very valuable to us."
"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 thing that could be improved is reducing the cost of usage and including some of the most pricey features, such as dynamic analysis and that sort of functionality, which makes the difference between different types of tools."
"Sometimes when we run a full scan, we have a bunch of issues in the code. We should not have any issues."
"Not fully integrated with CIT processes."
"The biggest deficiency is the integration with bug tracker systems. It might be better if the configuration screen presented for accessing the bug tracking systems could provide some flexibility."
"Temenos's (T-24) info basic is a separate programming interface, and such proprietary platforms and programming interfaces were not easily supported by the out-of-the-box versions of Fortify."
"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."
"​IBM Security AppScan Source is rather hard to use​."
"There is not a central management for static and dynamic."
"I would like to see the roadmap for this product. We are still waiting to see it as we have only so many resources."
"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."
"The product has some technical limitations."
"The solution needs to improve in some areas. The tool needs to add more languages. It also needs to improve its speed."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"AppScan needs to improve its handling of false positives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."
"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."
"Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."
"It is not more expensive than other solutions, but the pricing is competitive."
"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."
"The subscription model, on a per-scan basis, is a bit expensive. That's another reason we are not using it for all the apps."
"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."
"It's a yearly contract, but I don't remember the dollar amount."
"The price is very expensive."
"HCL AppScan is expensive."
"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."
"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."
"I rate the product's price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high. HCL AppScan is an expensive tool."
"The solution is cheap."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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?
Not challenges with the product itself. The product is very reliable. It does have a steep learning curve. But, again, one thing that Fortify or OpenText does very well is training. There are a lot...
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?
AppScan needs to improve its handling of false positives. It also requires enhancements in customer support, similar to what Veracode provides. Regularly scheduling calls with clients to discuss fe...
What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?
The primary use case for AppScan is for security purposes. I compare AppScan with other tools such as Veracode. We use AppScan for vulnerability detection and auto-remediation of vulnerabilities wi...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify on Demand vs. HCL AppScan and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.