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

Kiuwan vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

Kiuwan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
29th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
25th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
14th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.2%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.2%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Core Application Security3.2%
Kiuwan1.2%
Other95.6%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Mustufa Bhavnagarwala - PeerSpot reviewer
CyberRisk Solution Advisor at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
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.
Himanshu_Tyagi - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
Supports secure development pipelines and improves issue detection but limits internal visibility and needs broader dashboard integration
If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. That was the only reason we migrated from Fortify on Demand to another solution. Fortify has another tool which is Fortify WebInspect. On Demand is the outsourcing solution, and WebInspect you can use with your in-house team, which is basically the product developed by the Fortify team. For automated scanning, Fortify helps a lot. Regarding the visibility for the internal team, everyone is moving toward the DevSecOps side, and Fortify team has made good progress that you can integrate into your CICD pipeline. One thing I would highlight is if Fortify can focus more on the centralized dashboard of the tools because nowadays, tools such as SentinelOne also exist for identifying security issues, but they have a centralized dashboard that merges their cloud solution and application security side solution together. If you have one tool that works for different solutions, it helps a lot. They are doing good, but they should invest more on the AI side as well because AI security is evolving these days. On the cloud side, they have already made good progress, but I believe they should explore the new area related to AI security as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I've tried many open source applications and the remediation or correction actions that were provided by Kiuwan were very good in comparison."
"The solution offers very good technical support."
"I find it immensely helpful because it's not just about generating code; it's about ensuring efficiency in the execution."
"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."
"The solution has a continuous integration process."
"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 personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."
"I've found the reporting features the most helpful."
"The solution scans our code and provides us with a dashboard of all the vulnerabilities and the criticality of the vulnerabilities. It is very useful that they provide right then and there all the information about the vulnerability, including possible fixes, as well as some additional documentation and links to the authoritative sources of why this is an issue and what's the correct way to deal with it."
"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."
"It is a very easy tool for developers to use in parallel while they're doing the coding. It does auto scanning as we are progressing with the CI/CD pipeline. It has got very simple and efficient API support."
"What stands out to me is the user-friendliness of each feature."
"The most valuable feature is that it connects with your development platforms, such as Microsoft Information Server and Jira."
"The solution is very fast."
"t's a cloud-based solution, so there was no installation involved."
"The scanning capabilities, particularly for our repositories, have been invaluable."
 

Cons

"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."
"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."
"It would be beneficial to streamline calls and transitions seamlessly for improved functionality."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"It could improve its scalability abilities."
"The QA developer and security could be improved."
"The development-to-delivery phase."
"I would like to see additional languages supported."
"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."
"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."
"The solution has some issues with latency. Sometimes it takes a while to respond. This issue should be addressed."
"There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify."
"The UI could be better. Fortify should also suggest new packages in the product that can be upgraded. Currently, it shows that, but it's not visible enough. In future versions, I would like more insights about the types of vulnerabilities and the pages associated with the exact CVE."
"I would like to see improvement in CI integration and integration with GitLab or Jenkins. It needs to be more simple."
"They have a release coming out, which is full of new features. Based on their roadmap, there's nothing that I would suggest for them to put in it that they haven't already suggested. However, I am a customer, so I always think the pricing is something that could be improved. I am working with them on that, and they're very flexible. They work with their customers and kind of tailor the product to the customer's needs. So far, I am very happy with what they're able to provide. Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but that would be about it."
"The product has a lot of false positives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"This solution is cheaper than other tools."
"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."
"Check with your account manager."
"It is not more expensive than other solutions, but the pricing is competitive."
"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."
"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."
"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."
"The pricing can be improved because it is complex when compared to the competition."
"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"The product's cost depends on the type of license."
"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
University
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Consumer Goods Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise44
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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?
If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. T...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Kiuwan vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.