Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Acunetix vs Harness comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.9
Acunetix improves efficiency and security by automating vulnerability detection, reducing costs and manual testing efforts for businesses.
Sentiment score
9.0
Harness streamlines deployments, boosting efficiency, reducing errors, and lowering costs, validating its licensing investment through automation.
It saves a significant amount of time by covering attack surfaces.
Information Security Engineer at Tübitak Bilgem
I have seen a return on investment, as Acunetix helps reduce the man-days and effort needed for scanning bulk applications through automated assessments.
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
I have seen a return on investment with Acunetix, including time saved and cost reduction, because it provides us threats on our web application servers.
Cybersecurity Team Leader at EMAK For Integrated Solutions
By adopting templates and various different pipelines across our own IDP platform, we have saved upwards of 30 to 40% of development time.
Technical Associate at ZS
Time is saved because we now save engineering time. Before, it required two to three engineers actively monitoring production during deployments, but after starting to use Harness, there is zero or minimal manual monitoring.
Site Reliability Engineer at Granicus Inc.
With Harness, the release process decreased from three or four hours to one or two hours, making deployments much quicker.
Software Engineer at Citi
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.4
Acunetix's customer service is praised for responsiveness, yet users experience varying response times and suggest improvements.
Sentiment score
7.8
Users appreciate Harness support's responsiveness and effectiveness, praising timely incident reports, proactive notifications, and helpful communication.
For high-severity issues, they reach out within two to three hours, and for critical issues, a response is received within 15 minutes.
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
The technical support from Invicti is very good and fast.
Information Security Engineer at Tübitak Bilgem
Support staff not being familiar with the problem.
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
We have rarely faced issues with Harness tech support.
Senior AWS Consultant at Quantum Integrators
Harness customer support is really helpful anytime I try to reach out; they are available to assist with any issues I am facing.
Site Reliability Engineer at Granicus Inc.
We have been receiving incident reports whenever an incident occurs on Harness, and they are usually quick to respond.
Technical Associate at ZS
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.9
Acunetix efficiently manages growing workloads with adaptable deployment despite scan speed and Linux support challenges, with user satisfaction.
Sentiment score
7.7
Harness excels in scalability, supporting extensive applications, though performance may drop with over 20 integrations in enterprise settings.
Acunetix can handle increasing workloads and more applications easily.
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
Acunetix's scalability for my growing needs is great; it is a very scalable product compared to others.
Cybersecurity Team Leader at EMAK For Integrated Solutions
Our entire organization uses it with hundreds of applications, and it supports this scale effectively.
Senior Software Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
It is able to work on our infrastructure side, which is EKS, and we are able to handle our organization growth effectively for an enterprise use case.
Technical Associate at ZS
When I integrated Harness to more than 20 applications in one place, it becomes less stable.
Software Engineer at Citi
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.1
Acunetix is stable and reliable, with minimal issues and helpful support, offering consistent performance and reporting capabilities.
Sentiment score
7.2
Harness is stable and reliable, with minor integration issues and proactive communication during occasional downtime enhancing user experience.
I did not need to reach customer support because the product is very stable.
Cybersecurity Team Leader at EMAK For Integrated Solutions
We have rarely faced issues with Harness tech support.
Senior AWS Consultant at Quantum Integrators
Harness is decently stable.
Technical Associate at ZS
 

Room For Improvement

Acunetix needs improved scanning speed, reduced false positives, better reporting, enhanced support, flexible licensing, and improved mobile integration.
Harness needs streamlined setup, better security, improved automation, and flexible pricing to enhance efficiency and user experience.
The main concern is related to false positives; Acunetix needs to work on identifying valid and invalid findings.
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
Acunetix should have better integration with newer tools such as GitHub and Azure DevOps.
CEO at Xcelliti
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.
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
There is not a lot of good support for pipeline as code, and I often find myself not using pipeline as code the way other platforms such as GitHub Actions or Jenkins integrate pipeline as code.
Technical Associate at ZS
An improvement idea is better guided onboarding with more opinionated defaults and examples.
Site Reliability Engineer at Granicus Inc.
Previously, when deploying a version that had been deployed successfully before, it sometimes failed upon trying again, which seems to be an intermittent issue about stability.
Software Engineer at Citi
 

Setup Cost

Acunetix pricing is viewed as costly, with calls for more flexible and transparent pricing to match market standards.
The pricing cost is affordable for small and mid-sized organizations, and when compared to Checkmarx, it is significantly affordable, as Checkmarx is quite expensive.
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
We secured a special licensing model for penetration testing companies, which is cost-effective.
Information Security Engineer at Tübitak Bilgem
The pricing of Acunetix is pretty expensive and could be improved.
Senior Business Development Manager at Intouch World
From what I understand with respect to Harness, licensing and setup costs were relatively low for an enterprise, and the pricing was more catered toward enterprises who would invest in the technology.
Technical Associate at ZS
 

Valuable Features

Acunetix excels in vulnerability detection, offers comprehensive reports, scalability, and ease of use for enhanced application security.
Harness simplifies deployment with automation, AI-driven error handling, and intuitive design, enhancing safety, visibility, and efficiency for microservices.
Its most valuable role is in enhancing security by identifying potential vulnerabilities efficiently.
Senior Business Development Manager at Intouch World
The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities.
CEO at Xcelliti
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.
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
Harness uses AI to suggest errors in case of deployment failures.
Senior Software Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Meantime to recovery (MTTR) improved from 30 to 60 minutes before Harness to 5 to 10 minutes now.
Site Reliability Engineer at Granicus Inc.
The best features in Harness are its user-friendliness and setup configuration.
Senior AWS Consultant at Quantum Integrators
 

Categories and Ranking

Acunetix
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (12th), Vulnerability Management (19th), DevSecOps (6th)
Harness
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Build Automation (7th), Cloud Cost Management (9th), Feature Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.9%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Harness is 0.6%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Acunetix2.9%
Harness0.6%
Other96.5%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

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.
reviewer2787357 - PeerSpot reviewer
Site Reliability Engineer at Granicus Inc.
Automated delivery has made production releases safer and has reduced deployment incidents
The first point for improvement is the steep learning curve, where concepts such as services, environment, pipelines, and templates take time to understand. New users often need training before becoming productive, resulting in slower initial onboarding compared to simpler CD tools. An improvement idea is better guided onboarding with more opinionated defaults and examples. The second improvement can be on UI complexity and navigation; the UI can feel cluttered with many options and finding past executions, logs, or specific settings sometimes takes extra clicks, leading to small but noticeable productivity loss. Simplified UI views for common workflows and improved search and filtering could help. I also see cost and licensing as potential areas for improvement, as pricing can feel high for small teams and advanced features are tied to higher tiers, which may limit adoption for startups or smaller organizations. Flexible pricing models and more essential features in lower tiers could address this issue.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
29%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise17
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Large Enterprise7
 

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.
What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
My main use case for Acunetix is providing a vulnerability scanner for our web application server. I use Acunetix to scan our web security and discover vulnerabilities so we can patch these vulnera...
What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
My advice to others looking into using Acunetix is that it is really helpful to discover the web attacks and have great, powerful reporting so you can have reduced incidents to look at. I have rate...
What do you like most about Harness?
It's a highly customizable DevOps tool.
What needs improvement with Harness?
The first point for improvement is the steep learning curve, where concepts such as services, environment, pipelines, and templates take time to understand. New users often need training before bec...
What is your primary use case for Harness?
My main use case for Harness is continuous deployment (CD), specifically for safe, automated deployment to production, especially in Kubernetes and cloud environments. For continuous deployment in ...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
Armory
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
Linedata, Openbank, Home Depot, Advanced
Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. Harness and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.