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

Invicti vs Synopsys API Security Testing comparison

Invicti and Black Duck are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.7, while Black Duck is ranked #37. Invicti holds a 1.6% mindshare in SAST, compared to Black Duck’s 0.1% mindshare. Additionally, 96% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Black Duck users who would recommend it.
Invicti
Read 30 Invicti reviews
  • 2,995 Views
  • 2,276 Comparison Views
96% willing to recommend
Synopsys API Security Testing
Read 1 Synopsys API Security Testing review
  • 367 Views
  • 224 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive Summary
We performed a comparison between Invicti 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: 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

Invicti
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
14th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
API Security (6th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th)
Synopsys API Security Testing
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
37th
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
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 Invicti is 1.6%, up from 1.1% 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

Kunal M - PeerSpot reviewer
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
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

"It correctly parses DOM and JS and has really good support for URL Rewrite rules, which is important for today's websites."
"Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment."
"Attacking feature: Actually, attacking is not a solo feature. It contains many attack engines, Hawk, and many properties. But Netsparker's attacking mechanism is very flexible. This increases the vulnerability detection rate. Also, Netsparker made the Hawk for real-time interactive command-line-based exploit testing. It's very valuable for a vulnerability scanner."
"Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios."
"I am impressed with Invictus’ proof-based scanning. The solution has reduced the incidence of false positive vulnerabilities. It has helped us reduce our time and focus on vulnerabilities."
"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."
"When we try to manually exploit the vulnerabilities, it often takes time to realize what's going on and what needs to be done."
"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."
More Invicti pros
"The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares."
 

Cons

"The solution needs to make a more specific report."
"Invicti's reporting capabilities need enhancement. We need enterprise-level information instead of repo-level details. Unlike Appiro, Invicti does not provide portfolio-level insights into vulnerability remediation over time."
"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times. This needs to be looked into."
"Maybe the ability to make a good reporting format is needed."
"Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing."
"The support's response time could be faster since we are in different time zones."
"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."
"Invicti's reporting capabilities need enhancement."
More Invicti 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 price should be 20% lower"
"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."
"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."
"It is competitive in the security market."
"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."
"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."
"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."
More Invicti 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
864,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
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 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?
Invicti's reporting capabilities need enhancement. We need enterprise-level information instead of repo-level details. Unlike Appiro, Invicti does not provide portfolio-level insights into vulnerab...
See all answers
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

Acunetix vs Invicti Logo
Acunetix vs Invicti
Compared 19% of the time
OWASP Zap vs Invicti Logo
OWASP Zap vs Invicti
Compared 10% of the time
Veracode vs Invicti Logo
Veracode vs Invicti
Compared 7% of the time
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Invicti Logo
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Invicti
Compared 7% of the time
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti Logo
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti
Compared 6% of the time
More Invicti Competitors
No data available
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Invicti
July 2025
Invicti reportDownload Invicti product report
Buyer's Guide
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
July 2025
Synopsys API Security Testing reportDownload Synopsys API Security Testing product report
 

Also Known As

Netsparker
No data available
 

Overview

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

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

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