No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Acunetix vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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 DevSecOps
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (15th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (8th), Vulnerability Management (30th)
OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Ranking in DevSecOps
8th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the DevSecOps category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 6.0%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is 7.3%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
DevSecOps Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Acunetix6.0%
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing7.3%
Other86.7%
DevSecOps
 

Featured Reviews

Rahul Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
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 Acunetix positively impacts my organization by helping identify outdated libraries and applications, including legacy applications vulnerable to old attacks based on OWASP Top 10, thus aiding in compliance checks for PCI DSS and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.
AP
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."
"The product is really easy to use."
"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."
"We are happy, we're not unhappy with Acunetix, but we are very impressed by some of the things that it has been doing."
"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."
"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."
"Money was saved by using Acunetix; it is very helpful and has saved a lot of money from other tools."
"After two years it's about 300%."
"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."
"Easy to scan and then share scan reports, it has definitely streamlined many processes."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The product is a good option for enterprise-level organizations."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"There are lots of small settings and tools, like an HTTP editor, that are very useful."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
 

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."
"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 needs to improve its cost."
"Currently only supports web scanning."
"It is difficult to create a proxy connection."
"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."
"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."
"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"I'm not sure about the licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"The initial setup was complex."
"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."
"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 solution needs better integration with Microsoft's Azure Cloud or an extension of Azure DevOps."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."
"The solution is expensive."
"Implementing Acunetix needs a medium or larger business agency, because you need some money to get Acunetix. It is costly, but if you care about your agency's security, then maybe it's a cost that might help you in the future."
"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."
"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."
"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."
"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."
"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."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"The price is okay."
"This solution is very expensive."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which DevSecOps solutions are best for your needs.
896,387 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Government
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

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 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 ...
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
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 produ...
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...
 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
Aaron's
Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
896,387 professionals have used our research since 2012.