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

Acunetix vs Ox Security 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Acunetix
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
10th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (14th), Vulnerability Management (30th), DevSecOps (6th)
Ox Security
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
24th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (15th), Software Supply Chain Security (9th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.6%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ox Security is 1.2%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Acunetix2.6%
Ox Security1.2%
Other96.2%
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 Acunetix positively impacts my organization by helping identify outdated libraries and applications, including legacy applications vulnerable to old attacks based on OWASP Top 10, thus aiding in compliance checks for PCI DSS and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.
Yossi Shmulevitch - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner at SoftContact
Experience has raised visibility into vulnerabilities but still demands deeper customization options
Regarding threat detection capability, I think that Ox Security is not used for that matter. The CISO mainly focuses on dev sec ops rather than runtime security or real-time security. I figure that the most important metrics for the analytics feature are the critical issues dashboard, which helps understand whether there is a leak of a secret or a very critical vulnerability that is not being used. Another important aspect is the integration with other products like JFrog and X-ray, which shows not all the findings but mostly focuses on what Ox Security considers the most important issues. For instance, we found some issues that were flagged by JFrog, but Ox Security dismissed them, leading to discussions about whether those issues are real, as there are often false positives in the security world, as well as considerations about the attack surface for each vulnerability and whether these are truly critical issues or not. I work extensively with JFrog X-ray, which is my major tool for another customer. I believe that JFrog is more pinpointing, and I have some integration with JFrog with the build system, the CI/CD and X-ray vulnerabilities meter. It's quite useful, but I think that they serve different purposes; JFrog comes mostly from the artifact management side and less from security. Ox Security is mostly focused on the DevSecOps and areas that cannot be detected. In terms of vulnerability management, Ox Security has strong integration, but sometimes there are vulnerabilities that are disputed or dismissed, which creates an interesting intersection between the two products. From what I talked about with the DevOps team, deployment is quite straightforward. My overall review rating for Ox Security is zero.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 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."
"By integrating with CI/CD tools, it enables a shift-left approach in the development process."
"I find it to be one of the most comprehensive tools, with support for manual intervention."
"As a team, it's helped us to deliver better security assessments."
"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."
"If an organization has 100 plus applications and wants to use an automated scanner, they should definitely go ahead with Acunetix because it is very cost-effective and will save time compared to focusing on other solutions and performing manual security assessments."
"The most important feature is that it's a web-based graphical user interface. That is a great addition. Also, the ability to schedule scans is great."
"As a service provider, I believe the biggest advantage of Ox Security is its simplicity and the clarity of the issues, along with a very good dashboard showing the state of the company."
"Ox Security has positively impacted my organization by helping to reduce the amount of noise we received from vulnerabilities because of the prioritization scoring it has and all of the context it provides."
 

Cons

"The solution should work on dealing with the number of false positives it delivers."
"The time to fix issues is not too quick, so in the case of time-restricted projects for some customers, this might become a problem."
"The costs for the licensing have changed and it's not in our favor which is why we're now looking at other options."
"However, their response is too slow."
"The Acunetix licensing and pricing model is somewhat complicated. If we calculated all of our domains and sub-domains, the sum would be huge; that's why we thought of leaving Acunetix."
"There's a clear need for a reduction in pricing to make the service more accessible."
"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."
"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."
"My overall review rating for Ox Security is zero."
"The main pain point I have with Ox Security as a tool is the user interface, which can feel quite complex when navigating large datasets."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
"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."
"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."
"The solution is expensive."
"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 cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."
"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Educational Organization
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise19
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
In a typical enterprise environment, Acunetix is mainly used for visibility, detection, and investigation across network traffic. The main use cases usually fall into a few core areas, with primary...
What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
I advise that Acunetix is the best option. Invest time in proper initial configuration and scope definitions. The tool is powerful, but its effectiveness depends heavily on how the authenticated ar...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Acunetix?
Everything is perfect and good, including the pricing and all related aspects.
What needs improvement with Ox Security?
I'm not sure about flexibility because I didn't try it, so I can't comment on that, but as far as I understand, most of Ox Security is not personalized. I think that most of the tool is quite deter...
What is your primary use case for Ox Security?
I worked with Ox Security as a service provider, not as a representative, but as a user. I use it in my employee capacity, providing services to companies in Israel, and one of them is an insurance...
What advice do you have for others considering Ox Security?
Regarding threat detection capability, I think that Ox Security is not used for that matter. The CISO mainly focuses on dev sec ops rather than runtime security or real-time security. I figure that...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. Ox Security and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.