Digital.ai Release vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Digital.ai and OpenText are both solutions in the DevSecOps category. Digital.ai is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.0, while OpenText is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0. Digital.ai holds a 4.6% mindshare in DSO, compared to OpenText’s 6.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Digital.ai users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Digital.ai Release

Read 11 Digital.ai Release reviews

3,583 Views
1,218 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Read 22 OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing reviews

7,774 Views
1,944 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Digital.ai Release

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

Digital.ai Release and OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing are competing products in the software development and cybersecurity domains. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing seems to have the upper hand due to its comprehensive security tools, despite Digital.ai Release receiving positive feedback for its pricing and support.

Features: Digital.ai Release is known for its comprehensive release orchestration, automated workflows, and reusable pipeline templates. It also integrates seamlessly with various DevOps tools, enhancing overall workflow management. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing excels with advanced security testing features, offering vulnerability identification with speed and accuracy while integrating robust reporting tools for better vulnerability management.

Room for Improvement: Digital.ai Release could improve by enhancing its user interface for better ease of use, offering more comprehensive documentation, and expanding integrations with more third-party tools. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing could benefit from better customization options in reporting, reducing false positives in scans, and improving initial setup simplicity to avoid complications for first-time users.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Digital.ai Release provides a smooth deployment experience backed by strong support services, making it appealing for those prioritizing user support. OpenText focuses on efficient deployment models, emphasizing security-focused customer service to quickly address security issues, although it requires more initial setup time.

Pricing and ROI: Digital.ai Release is favored for its competitive pricing, offering a high return on investment through efficient release management. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, while requiring a higher setup cost, justifies its price with significant security benefits, enhancing ROI by effectively reducing potential vulnerabilities in applications.

To learn more, read our detailed Digital.ai Release vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Release vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 917,433 peers since 2012

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

Digital.ai Release

Ranking in DevSecOps

5th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Build Automation (9th), Release Automation (6th)

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Ranking in DevSecOps

11th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the DevSecOps category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Release is 4.6%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 6.6%, up from 6.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

DevSecOps Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Digital.ai Release	4.6%
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing	6.6%
Other	88.8%

DevSecOps

Featured Reviews

reviewer1442733

Application Architect at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Standardized releases have reduced errors and now streamline our cloud resource management

To improve Digital.ai Release, I think the user interface could be improved. For example, I have a plan phase before my build phase, and sometimes the toggle button is hidden. I have to toggle it before the step can be executed, or it will be skipped. Many people who did not use Digital.ai Release before do not even know there is a toggle button, and the first time when they run into that phase, they will definitely skip that step. Regarding needed improvements, I did not do extensive reading on documentation or training material directly from Digital.ai Release. My knowledge comes from the team who has been using it. However, I would appreciate standardized training material that would give me hands-on experience.

Read full review

ArnabPaul

Cyber Security Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Enhancements in manual testing align with reporting and integration features

WebInspect works efficiently with Java-based or .NET based applications. However, it struggles with Salesforce applications, where it requires approximately 20-24 hours to crawl and audit but produces minimal findings, necessitating manual verification. The solution offers customization features for crawling and vulnerability detection. It includes various security frameworks and allows selection of specific vulnerability types to audit, such as OWASP Top 10 or JavaScript-based vulnerabilities. When working with APIs, we can select OWASP API Top 10. The tool also supports custom audit features by combining different security frameworks. For on-premises deployment, the setup is complex, particularly regarding SQL server configuration. Unlike Burp Suite or OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, which have simpler setup processes, WebInspect requires SQL server setup to function.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Involving both infrastructure and application teams in the same pipeline has genuinely helped my process, as we have one specific person starting the pipeline, another approving it, and another coordinating as DevOps or monitoring all processes from the infrastructure side, providing excellent assistance because we have different and clearly separated responsibilities."

"The most valuable feature of Digital.ai Release is its ability to communicate with various deployment systems, such as XLD and batch deployments, as well as integrate with tools, such as Flyway and Bamboo. We use Bamboo as our build orchestrator, and Digital.ai Release also integrates with Jira, another Atlassian solution. These capabilities make it a powerful tool for managing workflow, test automation, and other processes."

"The solution can apply one template across multiple applications."

"Since using Digital.ai Release, one of the benefits is standardizing the way I release to my Azure environment, which in the long term will help me reduce costs and improve efficiency."

"Since we started using the manual testing module from Digital.ai, I have seen a positive impact on my organization as our test management has improved significantly."

"Since using Digital.ai Release, time has been saved, money has been saved, and staffing requirements have been reduced."

"Digital.ai Release offers the best features such as good integration between multiple tools and flexible options for usage; while I have not configured the template myself, I use existing templates and find that anything can be accomplished using the workflows and integrations."

"The time is also reduced because the manual work has tremendously decreased. We just have to click one button, and it will create everything for us."

More Digital.ai Release pros

"Reporting, centralized dashboard, and bird's eye view of all vulnerabilities are the most valuable features."

"The product is a good option for enterprise-level organizations."

"The solution is easy to use."

"The transaction recorder within WebInspect is easy to use, which is valuable for our team."

"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."

"It is easy to use, and its reporting is fairly simple."

"It is scalable and very easy to use."

"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing pros

Cons

"The solution is a little bit expensive."

"Digital.ai Release can be improved by reducing the number of tasks that need to be completed before starting a release, as there are too many tasks to get done."

"I feel that it could be more user-friendly, as the UI feels a bit old and not very appealing."

"One improvement for Digital.ai Release could be to simplify the user interface for beginners."

"I would like to improve Digital.ai Release by exploring its cloud capabilities as we are currently in the middle of migrating to the cloud, but I actually have no idea what Digital.ai's cloud capabilities are."

"Currently, we put artifact details manually. What we could improve, in our case, is the deployment instruction base. Developers input all the information, including which artifact and where it needs to be deployed. What Digital.ai could do is automatically go to the deployment instruction page, take those artifact details, and implement them."

"Overall, the price is just too high; especially considering we're in the middle of a pandemic."

"Digital.ai Release could improve by having a better plugin that works with Guardian that we use for mainframe migrations. If there could be an interface or plugin for Guardian that would be beneficial."

More Digital.ai Release cons

"A localized version, for example, in Korean would be a big improvement to this solution."

"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."

"The first time we ran the module, it was okay, however, the next time we ran it, it almost crashed."

"The initial setup was complex."

"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."

"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."

"Fortify WebInspect's shortcoming stems from the fact that it is a very expensive product in Korea, which makes it difficult for its potential customers to introduce the product in their IT environment."

"The solution needs better integration with Microsoft's Azure Cloud or an extension of Azure DevOps. In fact, it should better integrate with any cloud provider. Right now, it's quite difficult to integrate with that solution, from the cloud perspective."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Overall, the price is just too high; especially considering we're in the middle of a pandemic."

"The solution's license includes all features."

"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."

"The price is okay."

"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."

"Its price is almost similar to the price of AppScan. Both of them are very costly. Its price could be reduced because it can be very costly for unlimited IT scans, etc. I'm not sure, but it can go up to $40,000 to $50,000 or more than that."

"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."

"This solution is very expensive."

"It’s a fair price for the solution."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which DevSecOps solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

21%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Outsourcing Company

13%

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

12%

Government

10%

Outsourcing Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	8

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	15

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Digital.ai Release ?

In terms of pricing, Digital.ai Release is more of an enterprise-level investment. It is not a low-cost tool, and the actual cost depends on factors such as the number of users, deployment needs, a...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Digital.ai Release ?

A few challenges have been encountered, and from my experience, Digital.ai Release should improve the user interface. It has a lot of functionality, but some areas can be a little too complicated c...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Digital.ai Release ?

Digital.ai Release is used primarily to manage and automate the release process across software environments. Instead of having developers, testers, and operation teams coordinating every deploymen...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?

While I am not directly involved with licensing, I can share that our project's license for 1-9 applications costs between $15,000 to $19,000. In comparison, Burp Suite costs approximately $500 to ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Fortify WebInspect?

I am currently working with several tools. For Fortify, I use SCA and WebInspect. Apart from that, I use Burp Suite from PortSwigger. For API testing, I use Postman with Burp Suite or WebInspect fo...

See all answers

Comparisons

Jenkins vs Digital.ai Release

Compared 9% of the time

Endor Labs vs Digital.ai Release

Compared 9% of the time

CloudBees vs Digital.ai Release

Compared 8% of the time

GitLab vs Digital.ai Release

Compared 7% of the time

CircleCI vs Digital.ai Release

Compared 3% of the time

More Digital.ai Release Competitors

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 35% of the time

Invicti Web + API vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 7% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 6% of the time

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 4% of the time

Invicti vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Release

October 2026

Download Digital.ai Release product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

October 2026

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report

Download OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing product report

Also Known As

XL Release, XebiaLabs XL Release

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect

Overview

Digital.ai Release enhances deployment pipelines, integrating with tools like GitHub and Jenkins. It enables coordination across development, testing, and production while reducing manual efforts, making it ideal for large projects.

Digital.ai Release is designed to automate and orchestrate application deployments, offering features like email approvals, deployment notifications, and system communication with XLD. It supports integration with tools such as Bamboo, Jira, and MS Teams to create standardized deployment processes. While needing a simpler interface for newcomers, it provides efficient handling of environment-specific configurations and process oversight with metrics and data retention. Challenges include the high cost and complexity, with demands for improved mainframe migration support, automated deployment instructions, differentiated pricing by roles, enhanced cloud capabilities, and additional plugins.

What are the key features of Digital.ai Release?

Orchestration: Streamlines coordination across deployment stages.
Automated Workflows: Reduces manual documentation and efforts.
Pipeline Templates: Ensures standardized deployment processes.
Reliable Rollbacks: Facilitates seamless process reversals.
Tool Integrations: Connects with Jira, Bamboo, and MS Teams.
Deployment Notifications: Communicates updates efficiently with systems like XLD.

What benefits should users consider in reviews?

Reduced Manual Effort: Automates processes, saving time and resources.
Consistent Deployment: Ensures repeatable, reliable deployment practices.
Process Oversight: Enhances visibility with metrics and data retention.
Efficient Communication: Improves stakeholder engagement through notifications.

Digital.ai Release has found robust implementation in industries managing large-scale deployments, such as software development and IT services. It assists in orchestrating SQL database upgrades, server deployments, and user orchestration while enhancing release documentation and cross-team communication. This makes it valuable for teams requiring integration and logging through tools like Jira in complex projects like artifact installation and continuous delivery environments.

Digital.ai

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing offers robust scalability, ease of use, and high accuracy in scanning, making it a valuable tool for enterprises.

This security testing platform is known for its centralized dashboard, guided scans, and comprehensive reporting. It integrates seamlessly with tools like Fortify code scanner and supports extensive vulnerability detection and analysis, enhancing efficiency in security management. Despite its strengths, users suggest improvements in cloud integration, cost-effectiveness, and installation processes. Faster scans, reduced false positives, and improved mobile testing features are also desired.

What are the key features of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing?

Scalability: Easily adapts to changing enterprise needs.
Ease of Use: User-friendly interface with guided scans.
Comprehensive Reporting: Detailed vulnerability analysis and reporting.
Integration Capabilities: Works with Fortify code scanner and user authentication scanning.
Wide Vulnerability Detection: Identifies extensive security vulnerabilities.

What benefits should users expect from reviews?

Efficient Vulnerability Management: Streamlines security management in development environments.
Detailed Analysis: Provides in-depth insights into security issues.
Quick Setup: Easy to deploy within existing systems.
Enterprise Preference: Supports enterprise environments efficiently.

In industries like BFSI, OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is employed for performance network application testing, dynamic and static application security testing, and code checks. Security and QA teams use it in development processes to ensure application security prior to release, proving integral in both enterprise and testing environments.

OpenText

Sample Customers

3M, GE, John Deere, Deutsche Telekom, Cable & Wireless, Xerox, and Société Générale, Liberty Mutual, EA, Rabobank

Aaron's

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Release vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

September 2026

Free Report: Digital.ai Release vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Find out what your peers are saying about Digital.ai Release vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Digital.ai Release vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report.

See our list of best DevSecOps vendors.

We monitor all DevSecOps 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.