Defensics Protocol Fuzzing vs Invicti comparison

The compared Black Duck and Invicti solutions aren't in the same category. Black Duck is ranked #4 in FTT , and holds a 22.1% mindshare in the category. Invicti is ranked #5 in DAST , with an average rating of 8.7, and holds a 12.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Black Duck users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Invicti users who would recommend it.

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Read 4 Defensics Protocol Fuzzing reviews

1,123 Views
112 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Invicti

Read 30 Invicti reviews

2,834 Views
510 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Invicti

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

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Average Rating

8.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Fuzz Testing Tools (4th)

Invicti

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (14th), API Security (7th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (5th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Defensics Protocol Fuzzing is designed for Fuzz Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 22.1%, up 18.6% compared to last year.
Invicti, on the other hand, focuses on Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), holds 12.0% mindshare, up 11.1% since last year.

Fuzz Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Defensics Fuzzing	22.1%
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional	33.6%
GitLab	22.1%
Other	22.19999999999999%

Fuzz Testing Tools

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Invicti	12.0%
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing	17.9%
HCL AppScan	14.3%
Other	55.8%

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

Featured Reviews

Sarath Kumar Choday

Senior Technical Lead at HCL Technologies

Product security tests for switches and router sections

Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install. What I see in the documentation isn't that. Even if something doesn't malfunction, sometimes it is hard to install and execute. The product needs video documentation. This would help a lot more.

Read full review

Kunal M

Capability Center Leader, ETRM Platforms at Shell

Proactive scanning measures and realistic audit recommendations enhance development focus

Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment. This feature helps us focus on priorities and prioritize the development team's effort, integrating seamlessly with DevOps to facilitate proactive scans of environments. Invicti also provides audit recommendations that are quite realistic, making it easy to discuss plans with developers.

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

"Whatever the test suit they give, it is intelligent. It will understand the protocol and it will generate the test cases based on the protocol: protocol, message sequence, protocol, message structure... Because of that, we can eliminate a lot of unwanted test cases, so we can execute the tests and complete them very quickly."

"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."

"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."

"The scanner and the result generator are valuable features for us."

"Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms. This feature expands the attack surface."

"Netsparker provides a more interactive interface that is more appealing."

"The dashboard is really cool, and the features are really good. It tells you about the software version you're using in your web application. It gives you the entire technology stack, and that really helps. Both web and desktop apps are good in terms of application scanning. It has a lot of security checks that are easily customizable as per your requirements. It also has good customer support."

"Its ability to crawl a web application is quite different than another similar scanner."

"The scanner is light on the network and does not impact the network when scans are running."

"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."

"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."

More Invicti pros

Cons

"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."

"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."

"Sometimes, when we are testing embedded devices, when we trigger the test cases, the target will crash immediately. It is very difficult for us to identify the root cause of the crash because they do not provide sophisticated tools on the target side. They cover only the client-side application... They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful."

"The license could be better. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license. It's a major hindrance that we are facing while scanning applications, and we have to be sure that the URLs are the same and not different so that we do not end up consuming another license for it. Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. The licensing is tied to the URL, and it's restricted. If you have a URL that you scanned once, like a website, you cannot retry that same license. If you are scanning the same website but in a different domain or different URL, you might end up paying for a second license. It would also be better if they provided proper support for multi-factor authentications. In the next release, I would like them to include good multi-factor authentication support."

"The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker."

"It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities."

"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."

"Currently, there is nothing I would like to improve."

"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."

"The licensing model should be improved to be more cost-effective. There are URL restrictions that consume our license. Compared to other DAST solutions and task tools like WebInspect and Burp Enterprise, Invicti is very expensive. The solution’s scanning time is also very long compared to other DAST tools. It might be due to proof-based scanning."

"Right now, they are missing the static application security part, especially web application security."

More Invicti cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is a bit expensive."

"We are using an NFR license and I do not know the exact price of the NFR license. I think 20 FQDN for three years would cost around 35,000 US Dollars."

"It is competitive in the security market."

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."

"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."

"Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license."

"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."

"Invicti is best suited for large enterprises. I don't think small and medium-sized businesses can afford it. Maintenance costs aren't that great."

"The price should be 20% lower"

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

20%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

16%

Computer Software Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	13
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	13

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?

As a technical user, I do not handle pricing or licensing, but I am aware that Invicti offers flexible licensing models based on organizational needs.

See all answers

What do you like most about Invicti?

The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Invicti?

The main concern is on the performance side, but other than that, we find it really helpful in identifying web vulnerabilities. A full scan takes more time based on your website and other factors, ...

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 35% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 15% of the time

Veracode vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 12% of the time

Coverity Static vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 11% of the time

More Defensics Protocol Fuzzing Competitors

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 19% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Invicti

Compared 10% of the time

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 8% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional

July 2025

Download Defensics Protocol Fuzzing product report

Buyer's Guide

Invicti

September 2025

Download Invicti product report

Also Known As

Codenomicon Defensics

Netsparker

Overview

Defensics® fuzz testing is a comprehensive, powerful, and automated black box solution that enables organizations to effectively and efficiently discover and remediate security weaknesses in software. By taking a systematic and intelligent approach to negative testing, Defensics allows organizations to ensure software security without compromising on product innovation, increasing time to market, or inflating operational costs.

Black Duck

Invicti helps DevSecOps teams automate security tasks and save hundreds of hours each month by identifying web vulnerabilities that matter. Combining dynamic with interactive testing (DAST + IAST) and software composition analysis (SCA), Invicti scans every corner of an app to find what other tools miss with 99.98% accuracy, delivering on the promise of Zero Noise AppSec. Invicti helps discover all web assets — even ones that are lost, forgotten, or created by rogue departments. With an array of out-of-the-box integrations, DevSecOps teams can get ahead of their workloads to hit critical deadlines, improve processes, and communicate more effectively while reducing risk and hitting the ROI goals.

Invicti

Sample Customers

Coriant, CERT-FI, Next Generation Networks

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank

We monitor all Fuzz Testing Tools 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.