Acunetix vs Coverity comparison

Invicti and Black Duck are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.3, while Black Duck is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.0. Invicti holds a 3.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to Black Duck’s 7.0% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of Black Duck users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 33 Acunetix reviews

6,151 Views
3,998 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

Coverity

Read 43 Coverity reviews

12,588 Views
10,700 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Acunetix

Coverity

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Acunetix and Coverity are both leaders in cybersecurity and software quality. Acunetix is favored for its quick setup and scan capabilities, making it preferable for speed, while Coverity leads with comprehensive analysis, appealing to users needing deeper insights.

Features: Acunetix is known for automated vulnerability detection, ease of use, and swift web app security. Coverity provides extensive code analysis, seamless integration with developer workflows, and focuses on software integrity and compliance.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix could enhance platform integration, expand its vulnerability database, and improve its overall detection capabilities. Coverity users seek more user-friendly reporting, a reduction in false positives, and streamlined outputs.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix offers smooth deployment and responsive support, benefiting smaller teams. Coverity's deployment is more complex but supported effectively by customer service, making it suitable for large coding structures.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix is perceived as offering better value for smaller companies with competitive pricing and quick returns. Coverity, though pricier, provides high ROI through robust capabilities, appealing to enterprises seeking comprehensive software assurance.

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

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. Coverity

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,985 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)

12th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (16th), Vulnerability Management (21st), DevSecOps (6th)

Coverity

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

5th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 3.5%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Coverity is 7.0%, up from 6.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Coverity	7.0%
Acunetix	3.5%
Other	89.5%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil

CEO at Xcelliti

Has enabled teams to improve security testing with smooth integration and high accuracy

Acunetix has a very good ratio of fewer false positives, so users don't need to retest everything. Acunetix operates smoothly with no interruptions required, and it performs at 100% efficiency without issues in scanning anything. The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities. Acunetix integrates with every type of tool, including CI/CD tools, offering 100% integration in DevOps environments. The main benefit of Acunetix is that at the first level, users can address security issues related to penetration testing, allowing them to expose vulnerabilities and ensure all required testing is completed with very few false positives.

Read full review

Jaile Sebes

Senior Software Architect at Siemens Industry

Resolving critical software issues demands faster implementation and better integration

We use Coverity primarily to find issues such as software bugs and memory leaks, especially in C++ and C# projects. It helps us identify deadlocks, synchronization issues, and product crashes Coverity has been instrumental in resolving product crashes by detecting various issues like deadlocks.…

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 most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."

"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."

"It generates automated reports."

"Acunetix is the best service in the world. It is easy to manage. It gives a lot of information to the users to see and identify problems in their site or applications. It works very well."

"The features of Acunetix have proved most effective in identifying vulnerabilities."

"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."

"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."

"One of the features that I feel is groundbreaking, that I would like to see expanded on, is the IAS feature: The Interactive Application Security Testing module that gets loaded onto an application on a server, for more in-depth, granular findings. I think that is really neat. I haven't seen a lot of competitors doing that."

More Acunetix pros

"The most valuable feature of Coverity is its software security feature called the Checker. If you share some vulnerability or weakness then the software can find any potential security bug or defect. The code integration tool enables some secure coding standards and implements some Checkers for Live Duo. So we can enable secure coding and Azure in this tool. So in our software, we can make sure our software combines some industry supervised data."

"Coverity gives advisory and deviation features, which are some of the parts I liked."

"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."

"The most valuable feature is that there were not a whole lot of false positives, at least on the codebases that I looked at."

"Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."

"The most valuable feature of Coverity is the wrapper. We use the wrapper to build the C++ component, then we use the other code analysis to analyze the code to the build object, and then send back the result to the SonarQube server. Additionally, it is a powerful capabilities solution."

"The reporting feature is up to the mark."

"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."

More Coverity pros

Cons

"We have had issues during upgrades where their scans worked on some apps better with previous versions. Then, we had to work with their tech support, who were great, to get it fixed for the next version."

"The solution can be improved by adding the ability to scan subdomains automatically, and by providing reports that can be exported to external databases to share with other solutions."

"It should be easier to recreate something manually, with the manual tool, because Acunetix is an automatic tool. If it finds something, it should be easier to manually replicate it. Sometimes you don't get the raw data from the input and output, so that could be improved."

"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."

"Acunetix needs to be dynamic with JavaScript code, unlike Netsparker which can scan complex agents."

"The solution's pricing could be better."

"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."

"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."

More Acunetix cons

"The tool needs to improve its reporting."

"Its price can be improved. Price is always an issue with Synopsys."

"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."

"Coverity is far from perfection, and I'm not 100 percent sure it's helping me find what I need to find in my role. We need exactly what we are looking for, i.e. security errors and vulnerabilities. It doesn't seem to be reporting while we are changing our code."

"The setup takes very long."

"SCM integration is very poor in Coverity."

"Coverity concerns its dashboards and reporting."

"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."

More Coverity cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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."

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

"The price is exceptionally high."

"The solution is expensive."

"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."

"When we looked at all other vendors and what they were asking for, to provide a third of what Acunetix was capable of doing, it was an easy decision... But now that it's coming to a cost where it's line with market value, it becomes more of a competition... Acunetix is raising the cost of licensing. It's 3.5 times what we were initially quoted."

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

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"I would rate Coverity's pricing as a nine out of ten. It's already very expensive, and it's a problem for us to get more licenses due to the price. The pricing model has some good aspects - for example, a personal license gives access to all languages without code limitations, which is better than some competitors. However, it's still a lot of money for us to spend."

"The price is competitive with other solutions."

"The tool's price is somewhere in the middle. It's neither cheap nor expensive. I would rate the pricing a five out of ten."

"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."

"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."

"It is expensive."

"This is a pretty expensive solution. The overall value of the solution could be improved if the price was reduced. Licensing is done on an annual basis."

"The solution is affordable."

More Coverity 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

865,985 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Manufacturing Company

32%

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	14

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	31

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?

Most of the customers who use Acunetix are looking for security testing. The primary use case is performing penetration testing. The main use cases include vulnerability scanning, security testing,...

See all answers

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

Acunetix supports multi-user environments effectively. Acunetix is targeted for small to mid-size teams in a DevSecOps environment, making it the best choice for small and mid-size companies, offer...

See all answers

How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?

We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...

See all answers

What do you like most about Coverity?

The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?

I do not know about the pricing.

See all answers

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 17% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 11% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 8% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 8% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity

Compared 43% of the time

Klocwork vs Coverity

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Veracode vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

More Coverity Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

August 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

Coverity

August 2025

Download Coverity product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

Synopsys Static Analysis

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

Coverity gives you the speed, ease of use, accuracy, industry standards compliance, and scalability that you need to develop high-quality, secure applications. Coverity identifies critical software quality defects and security vulnerabilities in code as it’s written, early in the development process, when it’s least costly and easiest to fix. With the Code Sight integrated development environment (IDE) plugin, developers get accurate analysis in seconds in their IDE as they code. Precise actionable remediation advice and context-specific eLearning help your developers understand how to fix their prioritized issues quickly, without having to become security experts.

Coverity seamlessly integrates automated security testing into your CI/CD pipelines and supports your existing development tools and workflows. Choose where and how to do your development: on-premises or in the cloud with the Polaris Software Integrity Platform (SaaS), a highly scalable, cloud-based application security platform. Coverity supports more than 20 languages and 200 frameworks and templates.

Black Duck

Sample Customers

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

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. Coverity

July 2025

Free Report: Acunetix vs. Coverity

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,985 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Acunetix vs. Coverity report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.