We performed a comparison between Fortify on Demand and Snyk based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"The vulnerability detection and scanning are awesome features."
"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 user interface is good."
"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."
"The scanning capabilities, particularly for our repositories, have been invaluable."
"Fortify on Demand can be scaled very easily."
"The most valuable feature of Snyk is the software composition analysis."
"There are many valuable features. For example, the way the scanning feature works. The integration is cool because I can integrate it and I don't need to wait until the CACD, I can plug it in to our local ID, and there I can do the scanning. That is the part I like best."
"Static code analysis is one of the best features of the solution."
"We have integrated it into our software development environment. We have it in a couple different spots. Developers can use it at the point when they are developing. They can test it on their local machine. If the setup that they have is producing alerts or if they need to upgrade or patch, then at the testing phase when a product is being built for automated testing integrates with Snyk at that point and also produces some checks."
"I find SCA to be valuable. It can read your libraries, your license and bring the best way to resolve your problem in the best scenario."
"It has an accurate database of vulnerabilities with a low amount of false positives."
"Snyk performs software composition analysis (SCA) similar to other expensive tools."
"Provides clear information and is easy to follow with good feedback regarding code practices."
"Primarily for a complex, advanced website, they don't really understand some of the functionalities. So for instance, they could tell us that there is a vulnerability because somebody could possibly do something, but they don't really understand the code to realize that we actually negate that vulnerability through some other mechanism in the program. In addition, the technical support is just not there. We have open tickets. They don't respond. Even if they respond, we're not seeing eye to eye. As the company got sold and bought, the support got worse."
"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."
"We have some stability issues, but they are minimal."
"We would like a reduction in the time frame of scans. It takes us three to five days to run a scan now. We would like that reduced to under three days."
"Takes up a lot of resources which can slow things down."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the user interface by making it more user-friendly."
"I would like the solution to add AI support."
"There were some regulated compliances, which were not there."
"They were a couple of issues which happened because Snyk lacked some documentation on the integration side. Snyk is lacking a lot of documentation, and I would like to see them improve this. This is where we struggle a bit. For example, if something breaks, we can't figure out how to fix that issue. It may be a very simple thing, but because we don't have the proper documentation around an issue, it takes us a bit longer."
"They need to improve the Snyk plugins and make it easier to make your optimizations based on your own needs or features."
"Compatibility with other products would be great."
"It can be improved from the reporting perspective and scanning perspective. They can also improve it on the UI front."
"The solution's reporting and storage could be improved."
"We were using Microsoft Docker images. It was reporting some vulnerabilities, but we were not able to figure out the fix for them. It was reporting some vulnerabilities in the Docker images given by Microsoft, which were out of our control. That was the only limitation. Otherwise, it was good."
"Generating reports and visibility through reports are definitely things they can do better."
"The documentation sometimes is not relevant. It does not cover the latest updates, scanning, and configurations. The documentation for some things is wrong and does not cover some configuration scannings for the multiple project settings."
Fortify on Demand is ranked 8th in Application Security Tools with 57 reviews while Snyk is ranked 4th in Application Security Tools with 41 reviews. Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0, while Snyk is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortify on Demand writes "Provides good depth of scanning but is unfortunately not fully integrated with CIT processes ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Snyk writes "Performs software composition analysis (SCA) similar to other expensive tools". Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Coverity and HCL AppScan, whereas Snyk is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, GitHub Advanced Security, Fortify Static Code Analyzer and Aqua Cloud Security Platform. See our Fortify on Demand vs. Snyk report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.