No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs ReversingLabs comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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

PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (6th), Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
ReversingLabs
Ranking in Application Security Tools
41st
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (43rd), Container Security (52nd), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (25th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (29th), Software Supply Chain Security (19th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 3.5%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReversingLabs is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional3.5%
ReversingLabs0.9%
Other95.6%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

MH
Penetration Tester & Information Security Expert at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees
Dedicated browser and repeater have improved my proxy testing and manual vulnerability checks
I'm hoping perhaps for something to make it easier, such as to define things where if a message or a response is such and such, automatically make a request that is such and such. Perhaps something like this because otherwise, nowadays we have to do it manually. Perhaps they can automate it a bit more. Perhaps they could add some automation to things, to see what we do manually, which it has the tools to do manually, and perhaps enable with a click of a button to do things automatically. I'm not too sure which, but I'm sure they can from a product management point of view, do things that we need to do two, three, or four steps manually regarding specific testing. For instance, we want to check something specific if it's this or if it's that. Perhaps to define it once and have it more automatic, perhaps.
TC
Forensic Lead, Global Security Fusion Center at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Very good malware and goodware repository and enables us to look more deeply at indicators of compromise
The automated static analysis of malware is the most valuable feature. Its detection abilities are very good. It hits all of the different platforms out there, platforms that see the items in the wild. Also, the solution’s object and file analysis provide us with actionable insights. Its malware and goodware repository is very good. It's very robust. It gets all of the different repositories that are out there that do analysis and brings them under one roof where we can statically analyze for those indicators of compromise and look at them more deeply. If we need to go deeper into things, we can do that.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"This is a very nice tool and anybody can use it, from beginner to expert level."
"The crawling capability is excellent."
"We use the solution for vulnerability assessment in respect of the application and the sites."
"The free version is one of the best proxy tools for manual testing."
"The intercepting feature is the most valuable."
"The Spider is the most useful feature. It helps to analyze the entire web application, and it finds all the passes and offers an automated identification of security issues."
"I have found this solution has more plugins than other competitors which is a benefit."
"The extension that it provides with the community version for the skills mapping is excellent."
"The automated static analysis of malware is the most valuable feature. Its detection abilities are very good. It hits all of the different platforms out there, platforms that see the items in the wild."
"As far as the availability of the content is generally concerned and the number of malicious programs that can be looked up in the repository, these are very extensive."
"We have complete faith that it can do that for us, and can do it at scale."
"As far as static analysis information is concerned, we use most of the information that is available in order to determine whether or not we might be dealing with a malware variant. This includes information that is related to Java rules. This is also related to malware families indicated or specific malicious software variants that are labeled by name."
"ReversingLabs has a large sample size."
"It offers reports on a great many more file types than the other analysis solutions we have. It can give us a more in-depth analysis and better reporting on a larger number of file types. It also gives us a more comprehensive score on a number of things as well, and that's why we're using it as a front-end filter. It gives us more information... It's valuable because of its depth of information, as well as the breadth it gives us. There aren't a lot of tools that cover all of the different file types."
"We had nothing in the environment to do such analysis, so it's been a savior in many ways."
"As far as the malware repository is concerned, it's extensive. It's a good source for finding samples, where we are unable to find them on other channels or by leveraging other sources."
 

Cons

"BurpSuite has some issues regarding authentication with OAT tokens that need to be improved."
"The technical support team's response time is mostly delayed and should be improved."
"You can have many false positives in Burp Suite. It depends on the scale of the penetration testing."
"As with most automated security tools, there is still a high false positive issue."
"The vendor must provide documentation on how to use the new API feature."
"Integration is a big problem."
"The interface for the automatic scan can be improved because it is easy for technical users, but the business users have trouble with it."
"We'd like to have more integration potential across all versions of the product."
"I would like to see if we could do a little bit more of bulk uploading of hash sets. Right now, I can only do them individually."
"The solution needs to improve integrations."
"The product support could be better at times. Sometimes, the resources that they provide could be of higher quality."
"While the company is very helpful, it would be very much appreciated to have extensive proof of concept scripts for the different APIs available, though not for all the APIs that we have purchased. Respective scripts are available, but those scripts which are available are typically not of very high quality."
"We would really like further integration with our threat intelligence platform, which is called ThreatConnect. We would also really like further integrations with an endpoint protection product we use called Tanium. The reason I mentioned both of these is that ReversingLabs claims to have extensive integrations with both of them, but they did not work for us."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the pricing a four out of ten."
"The pricing of the solution is reasonable. We only need to pay for the annual subscription. I rate the pricing five out of ten."
"Pricing is not very high. It was around $200."
"The solution is reasonably priced."
"There are different licenses available that include a free version."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is an expensive solution."
"The price for the solution is expensive and could be cheaper. We pay an annual license and our team has several of them."
"It is expensive for us in Brazil because the currency exchange rate from a dollar to a Brazilian Real is quite steep."
"We have a yearly contract based on the number of queries and malicious programs which can be processed."
"Currently, the license number of lookups that we purchased has not been reached yet, because the integration has only recently been completed. However, our usage is expected and planned to increase over the next couple of months."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
University
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise35
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The cost of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is reasonable at approximately $500 per year per user.
What needs improvement with PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
I'm hoping perhaps for something to make it easier, such as to define things where if a message or a response is such and such, automatically make a request that is such and such. Perhaps something...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Burp
ReversingLabs Titanium, ReversingLabs secure.software
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
Financial services, healthcare, government, manufacturing, oil & gas, telecommunications, information technology
Find out what your peers are saying about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs. ReversingLabs and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.