We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Kiuwan based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."
"The usability and overall scan results are good."
"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."
"The solution is highly stable."
"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."
"Picks up weaknesses in our app setups."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report."
"We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."
"The solution has a continuous integration process."
"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."
"Software analytics for a lot of different languages including ABAP."
"I've tried many open source applications and the remediation or correction actions that were provided by Kiuwan were very good in comparison."
"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."
"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."
"Acunetix needs to improve its cost."
"Acunetix needs to include agent analysis."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"When monitoring the traffic we always have issues with the bandwidth consumption and the throttling of traffic."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."
"The only problem that they have is the price. It is a bit expensive, and you cannot change the number of applications for the whole year."
"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."
"Integration of the programming tools could be improved."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"Perhaps more languages supported."
"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."
"Kiuwan's support has room for improvement. You can only open a ticket is through email, and the support team is outside of our country. They should have a support number or chat."
"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."
"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."
Acunetix is ranked 16th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while Kiuwan is ranked 21st in Application Security Tools with 23 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Kiuwan is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kiuwan writes "Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Kiuwan is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Veracode, Snyk and Fortify on Demand. See our Acunetix vs. Kiuwan report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) 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.
