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

Invicti vs SUSE Rancher comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Invicti
Ranking in Container Security
25th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (11th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (8th), API Security (9th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (5th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (5th)
SUSE Rancher
Ranking in Container Security
33rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Invicti is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE Rancher is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Invicti0.6%
SUSE Rancher0.5%
Other98.9%
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Valavan Sivgalingam - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager, Security Engineering at ESS
Dynamic testing regularly identifies web vulnerabilities and has strong false positive confirmations
It has good false positive confirmations, confirmed issues identification, and proof of exploit-related features as part of it. We use Invicti for these things in our portfolios. The solution includes Proof-Based Scanning technology. Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios. For both the API endpoints and web applications, we do regular testing on a monthly basis for all our releases. Invicti does a good job. The only 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, but for us, it takes more than two to three days. The scan performance can be improved upon. When we check with them, they discuss proof-based scanning and related aspects. However, there could be intermittent results that could help us.
reviewer2785698 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Solutions Engineer at a leisure / travel company with 501-1,000 employees
Centralized management has unified multi‑cluster operations across clouds and data centers
There are multiple areas where SUSE Rancher can improve. The most pressing issue that I found in SUSE Rancher is that it is a bit slow. Compared with Komodor, it is very slow. Maintenance is also very high, and we require regular maintenance. Non-experts in Kubernetes cannot handle this application. It is a bit less stable compared with other tools in the market. In most regions, there is scope for improvement. There is a lot of scope for improvement, and there are a lot of issues in the tool, such as addressing the errors, addressing the stability, and addressing the reliability. It is a very good tool, so that is why I gave it a nine. However, it is not a great tool to get a ten. It is a bit costly compared with other tools in the market.

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 Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan."
"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."
"When we try to manually exploit the vulnerabilities, it often takes time to realize what's going on and what needs to be done."
"One of the features I like about this program is the low number of false positives and the support it offers."
"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."
"Invicti has done a commendable job with respect to ROI, and with respect to being a cost-effective solution and one of the market leaders as an effective solution for SAST and DAST, Invicti has performed very well."
"The scanner and the result generator are valuable features for us."
"Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment."
"SUSE Rancher is best used for large-scale applications such as ours; it manages very high-end infrastructure, and it has very good customer support, and it is very easy to understand in terms of usage."
"SUSE Rancher has positively impacted my organization as productivity is the main point, and the productivity has improved because the main project goal was to finish the project faster, which was particularly important since we have many applications."
"Rancher Desktop provides support for Kubernetes setup on local machines."
"SUSE Rancher has made things easier for my team and organization by reducing errors, as I use it every day of the week, and it shows us issues through dashboards."
"SUSE Rancher is best used for large-scale applications such as ours; it manages very high-end infrastructure, has very good customer support, and is very easy to understand in terms of usage."
"SUSE Rancher has positively impacted my organization with increased efficiency in a 10x manner."
"The most valuable features of SUSE Rancher include the user interface and the display features."
"Rancher Desktop provides support for Kubernetes setup on local machines."
 

Cons

"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times. This needs to be looked into."
"It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities."
"Invicti's reporting capabilities need enhancement."
"Reporting should be improved. The reporting options should be made better for end-users. Currently, it is possible, but it's not the best. Being able to choose what I want to see in my reports rather than being given prefixed information would make my life easier. I had to depend on the API for getting the content that I wanted. If they could fix the reporting feature to make it more comprehensive and user-friendly, it would help a lot of end-users. Everything else was good about this product."
"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."
"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."
"They don't really provide the proof of concept up to the level that we need in our organization. We are a consultancy firm, and we provide consultancy for the implementation and deployment solutions to our customers. When you run the scans and the scan is completed, it only shows the proof of exploit, which really doesn't work because the tool is running the scan and exploiting on the read-only form. You don't really know whether it is actually giving the proof of exploit. We cannot prove it manually to a customer that the exploit is genuine. It is really hard to perform it manually and prove it to the concerned development, remediation, and security teams. It is currently missing the static application security part of the application security, especially web application security. It would be really cool if they can integrate a SAS tool with their dynamic one."
"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."
"I have noticed that SUSE Rancher's GUI is slow because we have more than 1,000 pods, and when searching for a pod name, the page takes some time to load."
"Some initial setup and configuration were required by the admin side for enabling security policies, which were not supported initially."
"There are a lot of issues in the tool, such as addressing the errors, addressing the stability, and addressing the reliability."
"Some initial setup and configuration were required by the admin side for enabling security policies, which were not supported initially."
"There are a lot of issues in the tool, such as addressing the errors, addressing the stability, and addressing the reliability."
"I wish the container could be more lightweight so that anyone can test and verify SUSE Rancher Prime."
"Additional features for a paid solution should be included, such as more detailed insights, better graphics, and an improved user interface."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is competitive in the security market."
"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."
"The price should be 20% lower"
"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."
"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."
"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."
"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."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Outsourcing Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?
The setup cost is pretty competitive. For example, if you want to talk about the SAST license, it comes to about $150 or sometimes less than $100, depending on the conversion or the number of licen...
What needs improvement with Invicti?
At this time, there is nothing that comes to mind. However, most of the products in the market are pretty much neck-to-neck competitors. Speaking about it, there are a couple of factors which they ...
What is your primary use case for Invicti?
I have worked on a couple of products, specifically in web application security. I have worked on Invicti, and with respect to PAM, I have worked with BeyondTrust. I have not worked specifically fo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SUSE Rancher?
I do not know about the pricing, setup cost, and licensing information because another segment is responsible for this.
What needs improvement with SUSE Rancher?
I think SUSE Rancher can be improved, particularly because SUSE Manager, SUSE Rancher Manager, or SUSE Rancher Prime runs on containers. I wish the container could be more lightweight so that anyon...
What is your primary use case for SUSE Rancher?
My main use case for SUSE Rancher is managing multi-clusters, such as Kubernetes platform-based Kubernetes, GKE, AKS, and EKS. That was the main purpose. For managing those clusters with SUSE Ranch...
 

Also Known As

Netsparker
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Invicti vs. SUSE Rancher and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.