Acunetix vs Synopsys API Security Testing comparison

Invicti and Black Duck are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #13 with an average rating of 8.3, while Black Duck is ranked #37. Invicti holds a 3.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to Black Duck’s 0.1% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Black Duck users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 33 Acunetix reviews

6,393 Views
4,155 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

Synopsys API Security Testing

Read 1 Synopsys API Security Testing review

367 Views
224 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Acunetix

Synopsys API Security Testing

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Synopsys API Security Testing 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: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 864,053 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)

13th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (16th), Vulnerability Management (22nd), DevSecOps (6th)

Synopsys API Security Testing

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

37th

Average Rating

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 3.5%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Synopsys API Security Testing is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

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

UmarQureshi

Security Lead at a retailer with 10,001+ employees

Useful threat vectors, beneficial results, but implementation needed support

We are using Synopsys API Security Testing for scanning APIs for risks and vulnerabilities and to understand our posture before deployment within our business The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares. I have been…

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

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the speed at which it can scan multiple domains in just a few hours."

"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."

"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 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."

"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."

"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."

"It generates automated reports."

"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."

More Acunetix pros

"The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares."

Cons

"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."

"We have had issues during upgrades where their scans worked on some apps better with previous versions. Then, we had to work with their tech support, who were great, to get it fixed for the next version."

"The solution is generally stable, however, there might be room for improvement regarding glitches or bugs."

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

"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."

"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."

"There was an issue related to updates from the internet."

"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."

More Acunetix cons

"The solution required us to use our team and we spoke to Synopsys API Security Testing's support to do the implementation. We use two people from our team for the implementation. and one person for maintenance."

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."

"The price is exceptionally high."

"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."

"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."

"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."

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

864,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Insurance Company

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.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

Most of the customers who use Acunetix are looking for security testing. The primary use case is performing penetration testing. The main use cases include vulnerability scanning, security testing,...

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 11% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 9% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 8% of the time

Tenable.io Web Application Scanning vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

No data available

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

July 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

July 2025

Download Synopsys API Security Testing 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

AppSec testing optimized for the needs of API developers
APIs provide open, flexible interfaces that enable applications and services to talk to each other. But these characteristics can also make it difficult to build secure software—and even more difficult for traditional AppSec tools to test it.

Black Duck

Sample Customers

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

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

July 2025

Download Free Report

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

864,053 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.