Bugcrowd vs Pentera comparison

Bugcrowd and Pentera are both solutions in the Penetration Testing Services category. Bugcrowd is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.4, while Pentera is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. Bugcrowd holds a 13.6% mindshare in PTS, compared to Pentera’s 10.3% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Bugcrowd users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Pentera users who would recommend it.

Bugcrowd

Read 5 Bugcrowd reviews

3,443 Views
1,343 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Pentera

Read 9 Pentera reviews

6,739 Views
1,415 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Bugcrowd

Pentera

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

Bugcrowd and Pentera compete in the cybersecurity space for vulnerability management and automated security testing. Bugcrowd leads in user satisfaction regarding pricing and support, while Pentera excels with its feature set.

Features: Bugcrowd benefits from a broad community of researchers who provide real-time threat insights, a collaborative platform for vulnerability disclosure, and valuable bounty programs. Pentera's strengths include advanced automated penetration testing, continuous vulnerability assessment, and robust attack surface management tools.

Room for Improvement: Bugcrowd could enhance its platform by streamlining support services further, improving reporting tools, and expanding its vulnerability triage capabilities. Pentera could benefit from simplifying its deployment process, enhancing user interface intuitiveness, and providing more accessible training resources.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Bugcrowd is easier to deploy and provides strong customer support, making the onboarding experience smooth. Pentera's complex initial setup due to its extensive automation requires more effort but is balanced by responsive customer service that aids in addressing setup challenges.

Pricing and ROI: Bugcrowd offers flexible pricing that adapts to various budgets, providing significant ROI for cost-conscious users. Pentera's higher initial cost is offset by its rich features and automation, delivering substantial ROI through improved security posture over time.

To learn more, read our detailed Bugcrowd vs. Pentera Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Bugcrowd vs. Pentera

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,425 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

Bugcrowd

Ranking in Penetration Testing Services

3rd

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Managed Security Services Providers (MSSP) (3rd), Bug Bounty Platforms (1st), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (13th)

Pentera

Ranking in Penetration Testing Services

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) (3rd), Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Penetration Testing Services category, the mindshare of Bugcrowd is 13.6%, down from 16.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pentera is 10.3%, down from 15.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Penetration Testing Services Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Bugcrowd	13.6%
Pentera	10.3%
Other	76.1%

Penetration Testing Services

Featured Reviews

Ben Gurney

Senior Engineering Manager - Platform Team at eTender Inc

Crowdsourced triage has uncovered critical website vulnerabilities and continuously improves our security posture

Bugcrowd could be improved or enhanced as they seem to have a lot of internal churn at the moment, so they could be more stable and more customer-focused. By customer-focused, I mean they are not very good at communicating what is changing on their side to their customers. I am now on my fourth account manager within one year. My latest call with them was with the fourth account manager saying there have been many changes and apologizing that no one I have spoken to in the past is on this call, but going forwards it will be them. With the fourth account manager in a year, it is hard to trust that message.

Read full review

Sabbir Ahmed

Director at Infosonik Systems Ltd

Comprehensive attack surface coverage and real-world threat emulation strengthen security while licensing models need improvement

Comprehensive Attack Surface includes several features. Omni Attack Surface discovers, assesses, and exploits vulnerabilities across both internal networks and external assets, including cloud environments from a single platform. External Attack Surface Management (EASM) and Internal Network Validation test internal security controls and identify weaknesses within the internal network. Automated Penetration Testing features are provided through the Pentera Surface module. Surface provides automated validation and penetration testing features with a proactive, continuous, and highly realistic approach to cybersecurity validation, helping organizations understand and reduce their true cyber exposure. They have AI-based reporting that leverages AI to identify patterns of exploitability over time, aggregate results across sites, and highlight recurring weaknesses. They offer two types of reports: an elaborate technical report for CTOs and an Executive Summary for management. When customers see the reports after completing the POC, they are impressed by how detailed the technical report is, while management can understand what actions need to be taken to protect their network and infrastructure. Recent Gartner reports indicate that traditional VAPT companies perform vulnerability testing at specific times, which creates security gaps. Pentera provides continuous validation, running 24/7 in the infrastructure. This means when any vulnerability appears due to firmware upgrades, OS updates, or software changes, it can be automatically identified in real-time.

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

"I believe Bugcrowd is highly stable."

"I would rate Bugcrowd a ten out of ten."

"One of the features I like most about Bugcrowd is the ability to create a report in a very easy way."

"Bugcrowd has programs that disclose rewards and invite researchers to new programs."

"Bugcrowd's support team is very active and supportive."

"Bugcrowd's use of crowdsourced hackers has helped in discovering unique vulnerabilities."

"The most valuable aspect of Bugcrowd is that it provides a long list of different websites or web applications where I can report vulnerabilities."

"Working on Bugcrowd has made me a better security engineer since it provides a competitive environment to report successful vulnerabilities."

"Surface provides automated validation and penetration testing features with a proactive, continuous, and highly realistic approach to cybersecurity validation, helping organizations understand and reduce their true cyber exposure."

"Pentera has many authentic features."

"The most valuable feature of Pentera is that you can do continuous vulnerability assessment, which is automated."

"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."

"The product is easy to use."

"Pentera has many authentic features."

"The tool showed us that our ransomware protection wasn’t working on some machines."

"What I like the most about Pentera is its solution-oriented approach."

More Pentera pros

Cons

"There is room for improvement in Bugcrowd's response time when customer input is needed for resolving tickets. If this time could be minimized, it would be very helpful."

"There is room for improvement in Bugcrowd's response time when customer input is needed for resolving tickets."

"The triaging process has slowed down compared to three years ago. It now takes more time to resolve a reported vulnerability and receive the payout."

"Bugcrowd should provide more access to the reports, similar to HackerOne, allowing for full disclosure once a bug is resolved, so researchers can learn from them. They should improve the responsibility type and response time of their customer support, especially when the issue is urgent."

"Bugcrowd could be improved or enhanced as they seem to have a lot of internal churn at the moment, so they could be more stable and more customer-focused."

"The triaging process has slowed down compared to three years ago."

"Bugcrowd should provide more access to the reports, similar to HackerOne, allowing for full disclosure once a bug is resolved, so researchers can learn from them."

"One area for product improvement could be the inclusion of a dashboard to cover multiple branches and subsidiaries, allowing for centralized monitoring."

"The licensing and IP management need improvement."

"Pentera's general dashboards could be improved and made more specific in terms of vulnerabilities that I'm discovering."

"Maybe scalability. I know that the Pentera right now is high level in order to scan big deals over 500 IPs and not less, and not less. That can be more granular. This will be useful."

"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."

"The price could be improved."

"There is room for improvement in virtualization compatibility."

"The licensing and IP management need improvement. When the IP is imported into a system, we cannot withdraw or revoke the license."

More Pentera cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"It's not that expensive, but it could be more cost-effective."

"We have to pay a yearly licensing cost for Pentera."

"The tool is relatively cheap."

"The product's cost is reasonable. I rate the pricing a three out of ten."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Penetration Testing Services solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

879,425 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

12%

Comms Service Provider

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

University

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	4

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Bugcrowd?

I think the pricing and licensing of Bugcrowd are expensive, but we do get good value from it, as we find vulnerabilities that we would otherwise be unaware of.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Bugcrowd?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Bugcrowd?

I work with Bugcrowd mostly as a crowdsourcing security platform. I use Bugcrowd by putting a brief on Bugcrowd's website, and then their community of security researchers hunt for vulnerabilities ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Pentera?

What I like the most about Pentera is its solution-oriented approach.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pentera?

The licensing model has changed from earlier versions. Previously, there was a 500 IP cap, and customers needed to buy a minimum of 500 IP and consider 500 domains. In Bangladesh, many large organi...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Pentera?

Common use cases include several features. The POC is completed before any customer goes for procurement. Once the POC is done, customers appreciate features such as comprehensive attack surface co...

See all answers

Comparisons

HackerOne vs Bugcrowd

Compared 57% of the time

Synack vs Bugcrowd

Compared 21% of the time

YesWeHack vs Bugcrowd

Compared 10% of the time

Intigriti vs Bugcrowd

Compared 5% of the time

Crowdcurity vs Bugcrowd

Compared 3% of the time

More Bugcrowd Competitors

The NodeZero Platform by Horizon3.ai vs Pentera

Compared 20% of the time

Cymulate vs Pentera

Compared 15% of the time

Picus Security vs Pentera

Compared 11% of the time

Tenable Nessus vs Pentera

Compared 8% of the time

XM Cyber vs Pentera

Compared 7% of the time

More Pentera Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Managed Security Services Providers (MSSP)

December 2025

Download Bugcrowd product report

Buyer's Guide

Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)

November 2025

Download Pentera product report

Overview

By combining a vast and diverse workforce with a results-driven model, crowdsourced security programs outperform traditional methods-every time.

Bugcrowd

Pentera is the category leader for Automated Security Validation, allowing every organization to evaluate its security readiness, to know its real security risk at any given moment. Test all cybersecurity layers across the attack surface – inside and out – by safely emulating attacks & prioritize patching with a risk-based remediation roadmap.

Thousands of security professionals and service providers around the world use Pentera to guide remediation and close security gaps before they are exploited. For more info visit: pentera.io

Pentera

Sample Customers

Zephyr Health, Barracuda Networks, Western Union, Instructure, Aruba Networks, Pinterest, CARD.com, WINK, (ISC)2, StatusPage, WHMCS, Movember

Blackstone Group Caterpillar Apria Healthcare Taylor Vinters Sandler Capital Management Drawbridge BNP Paribas British Red Cross

Buyer's Guide

Bugcrowd vs. Pentera

December 2025

Free Report: Bugcrowd vs. Pentera

Find out what your peers are saying about Bugcrowd vs. Pentera and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,425 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Bugcrowd vs. Pentera report.

See our list of best Penetration Testing Services vendors.

We monitor all Penetration Testing Services 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.