Acunetix vs Invicti comparison

Read 31 Invicti reviews

4,405 Views
2,687 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Acunetix

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Acunetix and Invicti compete in web application security testing. Invicti is considered superior due to its more comprehensive feature set.

Features: Acunetix offers impressive automation capabilities, rapid scan speed, and extensive vulnerability coverage. Invicti provides exceptional accuracy, seamless integration capabilities, and advanced scanning features, giving it a competitive edge with enhanced security testing precision and features.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix users seek better error handling, improved report customization, and additional technical advancements. Invicti users desire faster scan times, interface updates, and performance improvements.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix is easy to install and complemented by responsive customer service. Invicti is recognized for straightforward deployment and proactive support, providing a remarkable customer service experience.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix is seen as cost-effective with satisfactory ROI, appealing to budget-conscious users. Invicti is pricier but justifies the cost through its robust feature set, delivering higher ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Acunetix vs. Invicti Report (Updated: April 2026).

Acunetix vs. Invicti

Download the complete report

Helped 889,855 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

Acunetix

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

9th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (14th), Vulnerability Management (29th), DevSecOps (5th)

Invicti

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

10th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Container Security (24th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (8th), API Security (8th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.6%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Invicti is 1.7%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Acunetix	2.6%
Invicti	1.7%
Other	95.7%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Rahul Kumar

Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees

Identifies vulnerabilities across bulk web applications but needs better support and cleaner reports

The best feature Acunetix offers is the centralized dashboard and the quality of reports it generates, which includes various options for selecting reports and developer options for directly sharing the reports with developers. The centralized dashboard of Acunetix gives visibility into the security aspects of mass applications; for instance, with more than 200 applications, it provides a valuable overview of findings and necessary fixes, along with a high-level summary that helps us achieve compliance through monthly and sometimes weekly scanning. In terms of reporting, Acunetix is excellent because it can generate different types of reports, such as an executive summary report, detailed reports, and developer reports that can be shared directly with developers. Acunetix positively impacts my organization by helping identify outdated libraries and applications, including legacy applications vulnerable to old attacks based on OWASP Top 10, thus aiding in compliance checks for PCI DSS and OWASP. Acunetix provides a centralized report with compliance-related aspects and a vulnerability timeline, effectively helping reduce vulnerabilities and save time.

Read full review

Valavan Sivgalingam

Senior Manager, Security Engineering at ESS

Dynamic testing regularly identifies web vulnerabilities and has strong false positive confirmations

It has good false positive confirmations, confirmed issues identification, and proof of exploit-related features as part of it. We use Invicti for these things in our portfolios. The solution includes Proof-Based Scanning technology. Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios. For both the API endpoints and web applications, we do regular testing on a monthly basis for all our releases. Invicti does a good job. The only concern is on the performance side, but other than that, we find it really helpful in identifying web vulnerabilities. A full scan takes more time based on your website and other factors, but for us, it takes more than two to three days. The scan performance can be improved upon. When we check with them, they discuss proof-based scanning and related aspects. However, there could be intermittent results that could help us.

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

"I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."

"It has been able to find some vulnerabilities, and we've been able to remediate our websites and vulnerabilities, thanks to Acunetix."

"The scalability is good. The scalability is more than good because it can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated as part of applications. So that really makes it a very, very versatile solution to have."

"The centralized dashboard of Acunetix gives visibility into the security aspects of mass applications; for instance, with more than 200 applications, it provides a valuable overview of findings and necessary fixes, along with a high-level summary that helps us achieve compliance through monthly and sometimes weekly scanning."

"We are able to create a report which shows the PCI DSS scoring and share it with the application teams. Then, they can correlate and see exactly what they need to fix, and why."

"The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code."

"Picks up weaknesses in our app setups."

"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."

More Acunetix pros

"We use simultaneous products, but I found this to be the best of the lot."

"NetSparker is a very easy to use and understand product."

"Netsparker offers some pretty features: Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms, this feature expands the attack surface, Attacking feature: Actually, attacking is not a solo feature, it contains many attack engines, Hawk, and many properties, but Netsparker's attacking mechanism is very flexible, this increases the vulnerability detection rate, also, Netsparker made the Hawk for real-time interactive command-line-based exploit testing, it's very valuable for a vulnerability scanner, and a very useful API for automating the scans."

"It has very good integration with the CI/CD pipeline."

"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."

"Technical support is very professional, 10/10."

"I would definitely recommend to those who really want to know in-depth details of their applications/products regarding the security of their web system."

"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."

More Invicti pros

Cons

"I believe Acunetix can improve customer support, as the dedicated support staff are often unfamiliar with problems and troubleshooting, leading to communication gaps that delay issue resolution."

"Acunetix should improve by further reducing false positives and providing more customized reports, plus better integration with newer tools such as GitHub and Azure DevOps."

"We want to see how much bandwidth usage it consumes. When we monitor traffic we have issues with the consumption and throttling of the traffic."

"In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us."

"The solution's pricing could be better."

"The jargon used makes it difficult for project managers to understand the issues, and the technical explanations used make it difficult for developers to understand issues. These things should be simplified much more. That would be very helpful for us when explaining to them what needs to be fixed. The report output needs to be simplified."

"Acunetix provides the benefit of saving time for an end user. I would not say it saves money because the cost and license of Acunetix is far more than what others offer."

More Acunetix cons

"They could enhance the support for data swap testing for the platform."

"Maybe supported clients can be improved. It still does not search vulnerabilities in DB2 databases, for example."

"The support's response time could be faster since we are in different time zones."

"I find that the scannings are not sufficiently updated."

"Improvement could be made in the area of production."

"Speed: It spends about one hour on scanning; I would like it to be less than 30 minutes."

"When scanning a large web-based application, it tends to process slow and takes a long time especially on crawling and attacking part."

"The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker."

More Invicti cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When compared with other products, the pricing is a little bit high. But it gives value for the price. It serves the purpose and is worthwhile for the price we pay."

"The price is exceptionally high."

"The solution is expensive."

"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."

"The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable."

"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."

"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."

"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."

"Invicti is best suited for large enterprises. I don't think small and medium-sized businesses can afford it. Maintenance costs aren't that great."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"It is competitive in the security market."

"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."

"We are using an NFR license and I do not know the exact price of the NFR license. I think 20 FQDN for three years would cost around 35,000 US Dollars."

"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

889,855 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	18

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	13

Questions from the Community

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

My main use of Acunetix is to scan my web application. I mostly deal with web applications and with Acunetix Network Security Component, but I have not activated the network component before and wi...

What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

I am still working with Acunetix, and we have even moved to their new platform, Invicti. I have requested a demo for Acunetix DeepScan technology, but I have yet to go through DeepScan. That was th...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Acunetix?

I would say the pricing is average, but still, it is higher than low.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?

The setup cost is pretty competitive. For example, if you want to talk about the SAST license, it comes to about $150 or sometimes less than $100, depending on the conversion or the number of licen...

What needs improvement with Invicti?

At this time, there is nothing that comes to mind. However, most of the products in the market are pretty much neck-to-neck competitors. Speaking about it, there are a couple of factors which they ...

What is your primary use case for Invicti?

I have worked on a couple of products, specifically in web application security. I have worked on Invicti, and with respect to PAM, I have worked with BeyondTrust. I have not worked specifically fo...

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 9% of the time

Compared 7% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 4% of the time

Veracode vs Acunetix

Compared 4% of the time

SonarQube vs Acunetix

Compared 4% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 9% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

SonarQube vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

Snyk vs Invicti

Compared 4% of the time

Rapid7 InsightAppSec vs Invicti

Compared 4% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

Product Reports

Acunetix

Download Acunetix product report

Download Invicti product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

Netsparker

Overview

Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner is an automated web application security testing tool that audits your web applications by checking for vulnerabilities like SQL Injection, Cross site scripting, and other exploitable vulnerabilities.

Invicti helps DevSecOps teams automate security tasks and save hundreds of hours each month by identifying web vulnerabilities that matter. Combining dynamic with interactive testing (DAST + IAST) and software composition analysis (SCA), Invicti scans every corner of an app to find what other tools miss with 99.98% accuracy, delivering on the promise of Zero Noise AppSec. Invicti helps discover all web assets — even ones that are lost, forgotten, or created by rogue departments. With an array of out-of-the-box integrations, DevSecOps teams can get ahead of their workloads to hit critical deadlines, improve processes, and communicate more effectively while reducing risk and hitting the ROI goals.

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank

Acunetix vs. Invicti