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

OpenText Core Application Security vs SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 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

OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (14th)
SonarQube Cloud (formerly S...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
10th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 4.0%, down from 4.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) is 4.8%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

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.
Archana Verma - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides valuable insights on code vulnerabilities and integrates seamlessly with CI/CD pipelines
I find SonarQube Cloud to be very user-friendly with an easy-to-use interface. It provides detailed code smell reports and insights on hotspots, which can later represent security vulnerabilities. It gives precise reports compared to Coverity and has a slightly lower number of false positives. It is integrated easily with the CI/CD pipeline, saving time and cost. It provides information on upcoming vulnerability details and loopholes that might turn into vulnerabilities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades."
"The solution saves us a lot of money. We're trying to reduce exposure and costs related to remediation."
"It is valuable in improving our overall security posture by catching significant errors."
"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 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."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"This product is top-notch solution and the technology is the best on the market."
"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."
"I'm not implementing the solutions. However, I've talked to the people who deploy the tools, and they are happy with how easy setting up SonarCloud is."
"Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service."
"For what it is meant to do, it works pretty well."
"Its dashboard provides a unified view of various code quality metrics, including code duplication, unit test coverage, and security hotspots."
"The solution provides continuous code analysis which has improved the quality of our code. It can raise alarms on vulnerabilities with immediate reports on the dashboard. Few things are false positives and we can customize the rules."
"The reports from SonarCloud are very good."
"The SaaS solution for checking code without execution and dealing with security issues is valuable."
"I find SonarQube Cloud very easy to use and simple to integrate initially."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"Sometimes when we run a full scan, we have a bunch of issues in the code. We should not have any issues."
"I would like to see improvement in CI integration and integration with GitLab or Jenkins. It needs to be more simple."
"The reporting capabilities need improvement, as there are some features that we would like to have but are not available at the moment."
"Fortify on Demand could be improved with support in Russia."
"The cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions."
"Not fully integrated with CIT processes."
"There's room for improvement in the configuration process, particularly during the initial setup phase."
"I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers."
"Reporting features are missing in SonarCloud."
"SonarCloud can improve the false positives. Sometimes the gates sometimes act a little weird. We then need to manually go and mark the false positive."
"I need a solution that can bring together three key areas: vulnerabilities, static scanning, and misarchitecture. Currently, to achieve our expectations, we have to use more than one product, as some products excel at scanning for vulnerabilities but are poor at checking code quality."
"It would be helpful if notifications could go out to an extra person."
"The documentation needs improvement on optimizing build time for seamless CI/CD integration with our Android apps."
"We had some issues with the scanner."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."
"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."
"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."
"The pricing can be improved because it is complex when compared to the competition."
"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."
"If I exceed one million lines of code, there might be an extra cost or a change in the pricing bracket."
"The product's cost depends on the type of license."
"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"The price of SonarCloud could be less expensive. We are using the community version and the price should be more reasonable."
"Previously, the pricing was 17,000 euros for five million lines analyzed. However, they now charge $15,000 per one million lines, significantly increasing the cost."
"I am using the free version of the solution."
"The current pricing is quite cheap."
"The price of SonarCloud is not expensive, it goes by the lines of code. 1 million lines per code are approximately 4,000 USD per year. If you need 2 million lines of code you would double the annual cost."
"While not extremely cheap, it aligns well with market standards and offers good value."
"I rate the pricing a five out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
860,711 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

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 SonarCloud?
Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SonarCloud?
From my experience, SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) is very expensive for small companies. It would be a great improvement if the price for smaller companies were reduced, as I do not have th...
What needs improvement with SonarCloud?
I need a solution that can bring together three key areas: vulnerabilities, static scanning, and misarchitecture. Currently, to achieve our expectations, we have to use more than one product, as so...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Core Application Security vs. SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
860,711 professionals have used our research since 2012.
OSZAR »