Acunetix vs CodeSonar comparison

Invicti and CodeSecure are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Invicti is ranked #17 with an average rating of 8.3, while CodeSecure is ranked #34 with an average rating of 7.0. Invicti holds a 2.8% mindshare in AS, compared to CodeSecure’s 1.5% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of CodeSecure users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 32 Acunetix reviews

3,283 Views
2,632 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

CodeSonar

Read 7 CodeSonar reviews

1,855 Views
1,189 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Acunetix

CodeSonar

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Acunetix and CodeSonar compete in the security testing and analysis sector. CodeSonar appears to have the upper hand due to its robust feature set despite the higher price point.

Features: Acunetix offers automated scanning, ease of integration, and efficiency. CodeSonar delivers advanced static analysis, deeper vulnerability identification, and comprehensive analysis.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix needs more advanced vulnerability analysis and improved reporting tools. It also requires enhancement in technical depth. CodeSonar could improve with a more streamlined configuration process and better user experience.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix is known for straightforward deployment and responsive customer service, suitable for teams with limited IT resources. CodeSonar's deployment is complex, but its knowledgeable support team is helpful.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix offers competitive setup costs and quick ROI, making it suitable for budget-conscious users. CodeSonar, while more expensive, provides lasting returns through enhanced software quality.

To learn more, read our detailed Acunetix vs. CodeSonar Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. CodeSonar

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 850,028 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 Application Security Tools

17th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (14th), Vulnerability Management (23rd), DevSecOps (6th)

CodeSonar

Ranking in Application Security Tools

34th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Code Analysis (8th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.8%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CodeSonar is 1.5%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

AnubhavGoswami

Compliance Manager at Compunnel

Attractive automated reports with boost user productivity and an easy setup

The primary use is mainly related to vulnerability assessment, including both public and internal IP addresses By using this tool, we have reduced the workload and increased the productivity of users. It generates automated reports. This feature is beneficial when sharing reports with clients as…

Read full review

Mathieu ALBRESPY

Intigration Developer at ez-Wheel

Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand

This is the first time I've used this kind of software. It was the only one we could apply to analyze with MISRA rules. At my new company, I tried to use Klocwork. I tried to use it, just once so I cannot compare it exactly with CodeSonar. I also have a plugin for my Visual Studio and I try to make it work. It's not easy, however, I don't think that we have this kind of functionality with CodeSonar. It can do some incremental analysis. However, since this feature is also available on CodeSonar, it would be a good idea to have a plugin on Visual Studio just to have a quick analysis.

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

"The tool's most valuable feature is performance."

"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."

"I find it to be one of the most comprehensive tools, with support for manual intervention."

"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."

"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 usability and overall scan results are good."

"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."

"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

"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."

"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."

"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."

"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."

"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."

"It has been able to scale."

"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."

Cons

"The cost can be reduced as management has noted it to be on the higher side."

"There was an issue related to updates from the internet."

"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 needs to include agent analysis."

"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."

"I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection."

"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."

"Acunetix needs to improve its cost."

More Acunetix cons

"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."

"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."

"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."

"It was expensive."

"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."

"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."

"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a bit expensive. If you need to check five applications, you have to pay almost 14,000. It is an agreement for two years at 7,000 per year for only five applications. You cannot change the applications in the license. So, you are stuck with the same license for the five applications for one full year."

"The solution is expensive."

"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."

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

"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."

"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."

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

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."

"The solution's price depends on the number of licenses needed and the source code for the project."

"Pricing is a bit costly."

"The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Government

Manufacturing Company

25%

Computer Software Company

13%

University

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

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.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

I typically use Acunetix ( /products/acunetix-reviews ) to identify vulnerabilities for clients.

See all answers

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

I would recommend Acunetix to others. Overall, I rate this solution seven out of ten.

See all answers

What do you like most about CodeSonar?

CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CodeSonar?

The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools. I rate its pricing a four out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with CodeSonar?

Our license model allows one user per license. Currently, we have limitations for VPN profiles. We can’t share the key with other users. There could be a shared licensing model for the users. It wi...

See all answers

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 17% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 12% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 10% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 7% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix

Compared 6% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs CodeSonar

Compared 60% of the time

Coverity vs CodeSonar

Compared 21% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs CodeSonar

Compared 8% of the time

Klocwork vs CodeSonar

Compared 3% of the time

Understand vs CodeSonar

Compared 3% of the time

More CodeSonar Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

April 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

April 2025

Download CodeSonar product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

No data available

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

GrammaTech enables organizations to develop software applications more efficiently, on-budget, and on-schedule by helping to eliminate harmful defects that can cause system failures, enable data breaches, and ultimately increase corporate liabilities in today’s connected world. GrammaTech is the developer of CodeSonar, the most powerful source and binary code analysis solution available today. Extraordinarily precise, CodeSonar finds, on average, 2 times more serious defects in software than other static analysis solutions. Designed for organizations with zero tolerance for defects and vulnerabilities in their applications, CodeSonar provides static analysis for applications where reliability and security are paramount - widely used by software developers in avionics, medical, automotive, industrial control, and other mission-critical applications. Some of GrammaTech's customers include Toyota, GE, Hyundai, Kawasaki, LG, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Northrop Grumman, Panasonic, and Samsung.

CodeSecure

Sample Customers

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

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. CodeSonar

April 2025

Free Report: Acunetix vs. CodeSonar

Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. CodeSonar and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Acunetix vs. CodeSonar 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.