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

Acunetix vs Ox Security comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (16th), Vulnerability Management (30th), DevSecOps (7th)
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) (13th), Software Supply Chain Security (9th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.6%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ox Security is 1.2%, up from 0.8% 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 Acunetix positively impacts my organization by helping identify outdated libraries and applications, including legacy applications vulnerable to old attacks based on OWASP Top 10, thus aiding in compliance checks for PCI DSS and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 usability and overall scan results are good."
"The scalability is more than good; it can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have, and this solution is simple enough, especially with the cloud."
"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."
"Login Sequence Recorder, scan throttling, and fantastic reporting output are the most valuable features."
"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"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."
"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."
"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."
"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

"Our experience with Acunetix has not been good, so we are in the process of switching solutions."
"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."
"There are quite a few false positives that come out. It's mostly based upon finding XSS vulnerabilities, even though we know that XSS vulnerabilities do not exist within some of the web applications because of some frameworks we're using."
"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing."
"The solution can be improved by adding the ability to scan subdomains automatically, and by providing reports that can be exported to external databases to share with other solutions."
"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."
"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 main pain point I have with Ox Security as a tool is the user interface, which can feel quite complex when navigating large datasets."
"My overall review rating for Ox Security is zero."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a bit expensive. If you need to check five applications, you have to pay almost 14,000. It is an agreement for two years at 7,000 per year for only five applications. You cannot change the applications in the license. So, you are stuck with the same license for the five applications for one full year."
"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."
"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."
"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 price is exceptionally high."
"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Educational Organization
8%
Computer Software Company
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: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.