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

Fortify on Demand vs Kiuwan 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:
 

Customer Service

No sentiment score available
Fortify on Demand's customer service is valued for excellence, but technical support responsiveness and coordination can sometimes falter.
No sentiment score available
Kiuwan's customer service is praised for expertise, though some note delays and email-only ticket submissions as limitations.
 

Room For Improvement

Sentiment score
5.4
Fortify on Demand needs better reporting, faster scans, expanded language support, streamlined UI, CI/CD integration, and improved customer support.
Sentiment score
4.5
Kiuwan needs to improve integration, user interface, language support, report accuracy, technical support, and vulnerability report generation.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.2
Fortify on Demand is highly scalable, flexible, and suitable for enterprises, despite occasional pricing and scan limitations.
Sentiment score
6.6
Kiuwan offers robust scalability across environments, supporting various user demands efficiently, though larger analytics may impact budget.
 

Setup Cost

No sentiment score available
Enterprise users report mixed pricing perceptions of Fortify on Demand, citing high cost but valuable features and scalability.
No sentiment score available
Kiuwan pricing is based on application size, with varying opinions on affordability, offering competitive value in the market.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.9
Fortify on Demand is stable and reliable, with minor issues, generally meeting user expectations with high stability scores.
Sentiment score
8.4
Kiuwan is highly stable and reliable, with rare minor issues and strong user satisfaction supported by effective technical support.
 

Valuable Features

Sentiment score
8.5
Fortify on Demand enhances security and efficiency with code scanning, CI/CD integration, real-time dashboards, and detailed reporting.
Sentiment score
8.1
Kiuwan integrates with Jenkins and JIRA, offering security scanning, lifecycle management, and user-friendly interface with actionable insights.
 

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
Kiuwan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
19th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
15th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Fortify on Demand is 5.2%, up from 4.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 0.9%, down from 1.1% 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.
Mustufa Bhavnagarwala - PeerSpot reviewer
Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement
Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran the tool and tried to scan the repository to find the security issues. The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

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 Kiuwan?
The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kiuwan?
I'm not entirely sure about the price and business aspects, but I assume Checkmarx might be less expensive. I think Checkmarx might offer more affordable options, especially in its smaller business...
What needs improvement with Kiuwan?
Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify on Demand vs. Kiuwan and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.