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

HCL AppScan vs Rapid7 AppSpider 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

HCL AppScan
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
17th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (20th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th)
Rapid7 AppSpider
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
32nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of HCL AppScan is 2.3%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 AppSpider is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
HCL AppScan2.3%
Rapid7 AppSpider0.7%
Other97.0%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Ravi Khanchandani - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder Director at Techsa Services
Has improved identification of encryption and authentication issues across cloud and on-prem applications
During the learning curve of onboarding HCL AppScan, we learned that HCL has altered the portfolio and now offers HCL AppScan 360, which has a much better look and feel with an improved user interface. However, there is one feature called SCA, which stands for Software Composition Analysis, that could be improved. When I'm doing an application scan, HCL AppScan has the ability to generate information about what components are in use. For example, if I'm scanning a web application, it shows me the various components being used. It tells me whether I have Java libraries, .NET frameworks, or other log management libraries such as Log4j, and what versions of those specific components are present. I would like to see more detailed reports from the tool. Currently, you can find out the components belonging to a specific software, but if detailed reporting became available, you would be in a better position to identify vulnerabilities. For instance, I could identify that I had the Log4j vulnerability and know that I need to fix my application accordingly. If they add the features I'm describing, I would consider giving them a higher rating. However, I've only been experienced with the product for three months.
HW
Marketing Expert at J's communication
Clients benefit from broad authentication and effective crawling but need localization improvements
Our clients use AppSpider to address security concerns for their websites. It is particularly used by customers who require security assessments One of the most valuable features of AppSpider is its broad range of authentication identification, which is a key reason for its utilization.…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It has certainly helped us find vulnerabilities in our software, so this is priceless in the end."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Postman."
"The solution is cheap."
"We use it as a security testing application."
"The HCL AppScan turnaround time for Burp Suite or any new feature request is pretty good, and that is why we are sticking with the HCL."
"The platform has valuable security features, helping us identify sensitive code issues and the possibility of internal applications' exposure to external threats."
"The solution offers services in a few specific development languages."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting, which is compliant with international standards."
"It is really accurate and the rate of false positives is very low."
"I like the ability the product has to detect vulnerabilities quickly, when it has been released in our environment, then displaying them to us."
"The solution is highly stable, rated at ten out of ten."
"Rapid7 AppSpider is good at managing different applications. It uses applets and generates reports to cover the PCA/GDPR compliance requirements."
"The most valuable feature of Rapid7 AppSpider is the vulnerability reporting data. Additionally, the data is reported in a convenient way rather than seeing them as a PDF. We are able to generate all the reports exactly what we want in a flexible way."
"One of the most valuable features of AppSpider is its broad range of authentication identification, which is a key reason for its utilization."
"What I like most about AppSpider is that it's easy to use and its automated scan gives me all the details I need to know when it comes to vulnerabilities and their solutions."
 

Cons

"AppScan needs to improve its handling of false positives."
"The pricing has room for improvement."
"I would love to see more containers. Many of the tools are great, they require an amount of configuration, setup and infrastructure. If most the applications were in a container, I think everything would be a little bit faster, because all our clients are now using containers."
"Improvement can be done as per customer requirements."
"Visibility is an issue for us. Our partners do not know we have integrations with some of IBM products."
"They could incorporate AI to enhance vulnerability detection and improve the product's reporting capabilities."
"We have experienced challenges when trying to integrate this solution with other products. When you compare it with the other SecOps products, the quality of the output is too low. It is not a new-age product. It is very outdated."
"There is not a central management for static and dynamic."
"This price of this solution is a little bit expensive."
"Integration could be better."
"The tech support is responsive but issues remain unresolved."
"The performance of the solution could improve. When I compare the speed it is slower than others on the market. There are some tricks we use to help speed up the solution."
"AppSpider could improve in the area of integration. They need to add more integration opportunities."
"It needs better integration with mobile applications."
"Implementing Rapid7 AppSpider requires scanning and self-identification mechanisms. You can add different types of authentication to each scan."
"The product needs to be able to scale for large companies, like ours. We have millions of IP addresses that need to be scanned, and the scalability is not great."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."
"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."
"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."
"HCL AppScan is expensive."
"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."
"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."
"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."
"The price is very expensive."
"It is expensive if you want to buy the Enterprise version that is able to scan multiple applications at once."
"The licensing cost depends on the number of users."
"The price of Rapid7 AppSpider cost 9,000 annually but there is limited usage. Large companies are able to negotiate a better price or a better deal for the usage with the vendor."
"The price is pretty fair."
"AppSpider is closed-source software and you need to acquire a license in order to use it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
880,435 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

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?
During the learning curve of onboarding HCL AppScan, we learned that HCL has altered the portfolio and now offers HCL AppScan 360, which has a much better look and feel with an improved user interf...
What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?
I'm currently working with BigFix and HCL AppScan. At least three people in my company are using HCL AppScan. Since we are a reseller, we run it in both lab environments and live production applica...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Rapid7 AppSpider?
The price is not high, but for Japanese customers, localization may incur additional costs.
What needs improvement with Rapid7 AppSpider?
For Japanese customers, localization is needed. The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users.
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 AppSpider?
Our clients use AppSpider to address security concerns for their websites. It is particularly used by customers who require security assessments.
 

Also Known As

IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
AppSpider
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
Microsoft
Find out what your peers are saying about HCL AppScan vs. Rapid7 AppSpider and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
880,435 professionals have used our research since 2012.