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

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 #39. 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
  • 4,230 Views
  • 1,142 Comparison Views
86% willing to recommend
Synopsys API Security Testing
Read 1 Synopsys API Security Testing review
  • 226 Views
  • 85 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
 

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).

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: June 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
June 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 856,873 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
33
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (16th), Vulnerability Management (22nd), DevSecOps (6th)
Synopsys API Security Testing
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
39th
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 3.5%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Synopsys API Security Testing is 0.1%, down 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 - 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.
Read full review
UmarQureshi - PeerSpot reviewer
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

"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"I find it to be one of the most comprehensive tools, with support for manual intervention."
"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"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."
"It generates automated reports."
"The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities."
"The tool's most valuable feature is performance."
More Acunetix pros
"The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares."
 

Cons

"It should be easier to recreate something manually, with the manual tool, because Acunetix is an automatic tool. If it finds something, it should be easier to manually replicate it. Sometimes you don't get the raw data from the input and output, so that could be improved."
"Acunetix needs to include agent analysis."
"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."
"We want to see how much bandwidth usage it consumes. When we monitor traffic we have issues with the consumption and throttling of the traffic."
"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."
"The jargon used makes it difficult for project managers to understand the issues, and the technical explanations used make it difficult for developers to understand issues. These things should be simplified much more. That would be very helpful for us when explaining to them what needs to be fixed. The report output needs to be simplified."
"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."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
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

"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."
"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
"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 costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
"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."
"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."
"The price is exceptionally high."
More Acunetix pricing and cost advice
Information not available
report
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
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%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Insurance Company
11%
 

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?
I typically use Acunetix ( /products/acunetix-reviews ) to identify vulnerabilities for clients.
See all answers
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.
See all answers
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix Logo
OWASP Zap vs Acunetix
Compared 17% of the time
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix Logo
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix
Compared 11% of the time
HCL AppScan vs Acunetix Logo
HCL AppScan vs Acunetix
Compared 9% of the time
Invicti vs Acunetix Logo
Invicti vs Acunetix
Compared 7% of the time
PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix Logo
PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix
Compared 6% of the time
More Acunetix Competitors
Invicti vs Synopsys API Security Testing Logo
Invicti vs Synopsys API Security Testing
Compared 100% of the time
More Synopsys API Security Testing Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Acunetix
June 2025
Acunetix reportDownload Acunetix product report
Buyer's Guide
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
June 2025
Synopsys API Security Testing reportDownload 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)
June 2025
Download Free Report
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: June 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
856,873 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.