Acunetix vs NowSecure comparison

Invicti and NowSecure are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.4, while NowSecure is ranked #37. Invicti holds a 3.1% mindshare in SAST, compared to NowSecure’s 0.3% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of NowSecure users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 33 Acunetix reviews

5,850 Views
3,803 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

NowSecure

Read 1 NowSecure review

422 Views
409 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Acunetix

NowSecure

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Acunetix and NowSecure based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST).

To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 868,787 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)

NowSecure

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

37th

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (19th)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 3.1%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NowSecure is 0.3%, up from 0.2% 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 (%)
Acunetix	3.1%
NowSecure	0.3%
Other	96.6%

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

AnirudhNair

Quality Assurance and Analyst Intern at a university with 201-500 employees

Scalable and reliable, but dynamic analysis needs improvement

I would advise others when testing using NowSecure to do secondary tests with other tools. For example, set it up in the local environment and recheck what the results of the reports are. Since the dynamic results are less accurate, I would suggest using static analysis. I rate NowSecure a seven out of ten.

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

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

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

"We are able to create a report which shows the PCI DSS scoring and share it with the application teams. Then, they can correlate and see exactly what they need to fix, and why."

"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 automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment."

"The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities."

"Overall, it's a very good tool and a very good engine."

More Acunetix pros

"The most valuable feature is the ability to download an application without actually putting in the APK. It gives us an option to put the APK in if we want to but we can download it from the App Store and Play Store."

Cons

"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."

"The solution's pricing could be better."

"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."

"It is difficult to create a proxy connection."

"Acunetix should improve by further reducing false positives and providing more customized reports, plus better integration with newer tools such as GitHub and Azure DevOps."

"You can't actually change your password after you've set it unless you go back into the administration account and you change it there. Thus, if you're locked out and don't remember your password, that's a thing."

"Integration into other tools is very limited for Acunetix. While we're trying to incorporate a CI/CD process where we're integrating with JIRA and we're integrating with Jenkins and Chef, it becomes problematic. Other tools give you a high integration capability to connect into different solutions that you may already have, like JIRA."

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

More Acunetix cons

"In this solution, there are two kinds of testing, static analysis, and dynamic analysis. There needs some improvement in testing with dynamic analysis because I have found it is not accurate"

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

"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 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."

"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."

"The solution is expensive."

"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 price is exceptionally high."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

Information not available

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

868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

University

Financial Services Firm

17%

Retailer

15%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Insurance Company

11%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

No data available

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?

The primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner is automated scanning and detection of security vulnerabilities in web applications, websites, and APIs.

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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 17% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 9% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 8% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 8% of the time

Veracode vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

Veracode vs NowSecure

Compared 43% of the time

Data Theorem API Secure vs NowSecure

Compared 34% of the time

Checkmarx One vs NowSecure

Compared 23% of the time

More NowSecure Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

October 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

Mobile App Testing Tools

September 2025

Download NowSecure 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

NowSecure experts have conducted advanced pen testing for some of the world's most demanding organizations - including banks, insurance companies, government agencies, healthcare organizations, retail conglomerates, high-tech businesses, and more. Mobile apps are prone to sensitive data leakages and attacks, yet a manual test for just one app can take several weeks. To enable faster, more frequent testing, we built a test engine that successfully automates repeatable and time-consuming mobile appsec testing, remediation and reporting tasks. The result - the foundation of the NowSecure platform, which significantly reduces testing time and costs without compromising full depth of security coverage.

NowSecure

Sample Customers

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

Vaporstream, FIS, MEA Financial, Silent Circle, Capital One, Citi, EY, EMC, Emerson, Kaiser Permanente, The Home Depot, Humana, Shell, Kellogg's, TD Bank, VMware

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

September 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.