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)
15th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (15th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd)
Rapid7 AppSpider
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
30th
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 November 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of HCL AppScan is 2.5%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rapid7 AppSpider is 0.6%, up from 0.4% 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 AppScan2.5%
Rapid7 AppSpider0.6%
Other96.9%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

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…
Rizwan-Alam - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy automated web app scanning, but gives many false positives and isn't always stable
One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions. This is the main aspect that I hope to see Rapid7 improve on. Beyond reducing false positives, I would also like to see them implement better reporting features, particularly in the executive summary type of reports which need to be user-friendly and easily understood by non-technical people. The recommendations and solutions on these reports could always be improved to make them more relevant, too. Lastly, the stability isn't that great, and sometimes it becomes non-responsive. I feel like the stability of the application is very average and currently needs more work.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 static scans are good, and the SaaS as well."
"There's extensive functionality with custom rules and a custom knowledge base."
"You can easily find particular features and functions through the UI."
"We leverage it as a quality check against code."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Postman."
"It's generally a very user-friendly tool. Anyone can easily learn how to scan"
"The solution is easy to install. I would rate the product's setup between six to seven out of ten. The deployment time depends on the applications that need to be scanned. We have a development and operations team to take care of the product's maintenance."
"It is really accurate and the rate of false positives is very low."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting, which is compliant with international standards."
"The setup is usually straightforward."
"The entire solution is interactive and has a point-and-click user experience, which makes it easy to find items or drill down on information. You don't need specialized skills to use the product."
"Rapid7 AppSpider is good at managing different applications. It uses applets and generates reports to cover the PCA/GDPR compliance requirements."
"It scans all the components developed within a web application."
"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 initial deployment is very straightforward and simple. The product is stable if configured properly."
 

Cons

"The pricing has room for improvement."
"The solution needs to improve in some areas. The tool needs to add more languages. It also needs to improve its speed."
"The product has some technical limitations."
"It has crashed at times."
"The solution's scalability can be a matter of concern because one license runs on one machine only."
"AppScan is too complicated and should be made more user-friendly."
"The tool should improve its output. Scanning is not a challenge anymore since there are many such tools available in the market. The product needs to focus on how its output is being used by end users. It should be also more user-friendly. One of the major challenges is in the tool's integration with applications that need to be scanned. Sometimes, the scanning is not proper."
"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."
"There are some glitches with stability, and it is an area for improvement."
"The solution is too slow. It could take a full day to scan. Competitors are much faster."
"AppSpider has some problems with the RAM needed while scanning."
"For Japanese customers, localization is needed. The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users."
"One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions."
"Implementing Rapid7 AppSpider requires scanning and self-identification mechanisms. You can add different types of authentication to each scan."
"Integration could be better."
"The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users."
 

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."
"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."
"The tool was expensive."
"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."
"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."
"HCL AppScan is expensive."
"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."
"The product is moderately priced, though it's an investment due to extensive code analysis needs."
"AppSpider is closed-source software and you need to acquire a license in order to use it."
"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 is pretty fair."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
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?
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...
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: November 2025.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.