Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Acunetix vs Spirent CyberFlood comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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 Application Security Tools
16th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
13th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (22nd), DevSecOps (6th)
Spirent CyberFlood
Ranking in Application Security Tools
47th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
31st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.9%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Spirent CyberFlood is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Jos Badimo - PeerSpot reviewer
Test assurance improves compliance and products with good performance
The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation. The most significant issue I encounter with the solution is the user interface. It would be beneficial if I could remain on one screen most of the time. Even if the system navigates me to another screen, it should effectively return me to the main screen.

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."
"By integrating with CI/CD tools, it enables a shift-left approach in the development process."
"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."
"It can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."
"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."
"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."
"It generates automated reports."
"CyberFlood is flexible."
"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."
"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."
"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."
"The testing compliance feature is particularly impressive."
"The testing compliance feature is particularly impressive."
 

Cons

"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."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"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."
"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."
"I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection."
"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."
"Acunetix needs to include agent analysis."
"Acunetix needs to improve its cost."
"Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing."
"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."
"The initial setup is not straightforward and can be quite challenging."
"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."
"The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation."
"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."
"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."
"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."
"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 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."
"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 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."
"CyberFlood is reasonably priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
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.
What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
I typically use Acunetix ( /products/acunetix-reviews ) to identify vulnerabilities for clients.
What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
I would recommend Acunetix to others. Overall, I rate this solution seven out of ten.
What needs improvement with Spirent CyberFlood?
The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation. The most significant issue I encounter with the solution is the user interface. It would be beneficial if I could remain on one...
What is your primary use case for Spirent CyberFlood?
I have been using the solution for a year now. The customers I work with are focused on both custom test assurance and test automation. The solution is utilized in the financial services sector and...
What advice do you have for others considering Spirent CyberFlood?
The language barrier and time difference pose significant issues with customer support. The price is competitive. The biggest benefits I find are test assurance, the reliability of the test results...
 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
CyberFlood Virtual, Spirent Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing, Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
Digicel
Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. Spirent CyberFlood and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.