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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Fortify on Demand
Ranking in Application Security Tools
15th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Kiuwan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
28th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
24th
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 April 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Fortify on Demand is 4.5%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.1%, up from 1.0% 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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It improves future security scans."
"The static code analyzers are the most valuable features of this solution."
"There is not only one specific feature that we find valuable. The idea is to integrate the solution in DevSecOps which we were able to do."
"The most valuable features are the detailed reporting and the ability to set up deep scanning of the software, both of which are in the same place."
"The UL is easy to use compared to that of other tools, and it is highly reliable. The findings provide a lower number of false positives."
"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."
"Audit workbench: for on-the-fly defect auditing."
"This product is top-notch solution and the technology is the best on the market."
"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."
"I've tried many open source applications and the remediation or correction actions that were provided by Kiuwan were very good in comparison."
"The most valuable feature is the time to resolution, where it tells you how long it is going to take to get to a zero-base or a five-star security rating."
"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."
"The solution offers very good technical support."
"​We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."
"I find it immensely helpful because it's not just about generating code; it's about ensuring efficiency in the execution."
"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."
 

Cons

"It does scanning for all virtual machines and other things, but it doesn't do the scanning for containers. It currently lacks the ability to do the scanning on containers. We're asking their product management team to expand this capability to containers."
"Fortify on Demand needs to improve its pricing."
"An improvement would be the ability to get vulnerabilities flowing automatically into another system."
"The cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions."
"The solution has some issues with latency. Sometimes it takes a while to respond. This issue should be addressed."
"The vulnerability analysis does not always provide guidelines for what the developer should do in order to correct the problem, which means that the code has to be manually inspected and understood."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand cannot be run from a Linux Agent. When we are coding the endpoint it will not work, we have to use Windows Agent. This is something they could improve."
"There are many false positives identified by the solution."
"The QA developer and security could be improved."
"The development-to-delivery phase."
"Kiuwan's support has room for improvement. You can only open a ticket is through email, and the support team is outside of our country. They should have a support number or chat."
"Perhaps more languages supported."
"I would like to see better integration with the Visual Studio and Eclipse IDEs."
"It could improve its scalability abilities."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"I would like to see additional languages supported."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."
"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."
"If I exceed one million lines of code, there might be an extra cost or a change in the pricing bracket."
"I'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."
"There are different costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand depending on the assessments you want to use. There is only a standard license needed to use the solution."
"Buying a license would be feasible for regular use. For intermittent use, the cloud-based option can be used (Fortify on Demand)."
"Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."
"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."
"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."
"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."
"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."
"Check with your account manager."
"This solution is cheaper than other tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Insurance Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
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?
There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify. One day it may pass a scan with no issues, and the next day, without any code changes, it will report vulnerabilities such as passw...
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...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
No data available
 

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: April 2025.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.