Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025
Acunetix and SonarQube Server compete in the security testing and code quality analysis space. While both offer compelling features, Acunetix's strengths in vulnerability detection and usability provide an edge in security, whereas SonarQube excels in language support and integration within development pipelines.
Features: Acunetix includes Interactive Application Security Testing for granular vulnerability identification, comprehensive scanning capabilities with minimal false positives, and swift scheduling for efficient security testing. SonarQube Server offers extensive language support, seamless integration within development pipelines, and rich analytics tools providing deep insights into code quality.
Room for Improvement: Acunetix could improve its licensing model, enhance database integration with PCI standards, and provide clearer reporting. Users have noted occasional false positives and seek better functionality for manual validation. SonarQube Server would benefit from improved handling of false positives, more robust security scanning, and simpler integration with third-party security tools.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both products support multiple deployment options, including On-premises, Private Cloud, and Hybrid Cloud. Acunetix offers broader cloud configuration support. Its customer service is noted for being responsive and available 24/7, while SonarQube’s support is primarily ticket-based with average response times.
Pricing and ROI: Acunetix, known for its advanced features, is considered expensive, which has raised questions about its cost-effectiveness. In contrast, SonarQube Server appeals to cost-conscious organizations with open-source options, including a free Community Edition, making it more accessible despite less comprehensive vulnerability reporting compared to Acunetix.
