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

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Sonatype Lifecycle 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
1.0
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional offers over 200% ROI, enhancing client engagement and securing application security testing contracts effectively.
Sentiment score
7.0
Sonatype Lifecycle enhances visibility, security, and productivity, reducing vulnerability analysis time and lowering risks in application development.
We have seen cost savings and efficiency improvements as we now know what happens in what was previously a black box.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
5.0
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional offers responsive customer support with effective documentation and community resources, ensuring quick issue resolution.
Sentiment score
5.7
Sonatype Lifecycle's customer service is praised for responsiveness and effectiveness, despite occasional delays with product enhancement requests.
The technical support from PortSwigger is excellent.
The technical support for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is pretty good, and I would give it a nine.
They are helpful when we raise any tickets.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.2
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional excels in CI/CD integration but faces challenges in automation, mobile testing, and report generation.
Sentiment score
6.9
Sonatype Lifecycle is praised for infrastructure scalability and flexibility, but users report challenges with clustering and configuration complexities.
JFrog is easier to configure for high availability as it does not require extra components.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.6
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is reliable with high satisfaction, though some users report memory issues in large-scale tasks.
Sentiment score
8.0
Sonatype Lifecycle is reliable and efficient, with minimal downtime and ease of use, even for large implementations.
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is very stable.
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is a very stable tool, and I would rate its stability as eight out of ten.
Sonatype Lifecycle is very stable, especially in the binary repository management use case for managing binary artifacts.
 

Room For Improvement

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional requires improvements in usability, performance, pricing, integration, and support to enhance user experience.
Sonatype Lifecycle should improve integration, reporting, support, user interface, and adapt to modern practices for better user experience.
Some AI features might be added.
The dashboard of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional could be made more user-friendly.
We also noticed a lack of detailed information for configuring Sonatype Lifecycle for high availability and data recovery.
 

Setup Cost

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional offers competitive pricing and value for automated testing, with various license options.
Sonatype Lifecycle offers competitive pricing with valuable features, though costs may impact startups due to licensing complexity.
The pricing for PortSwigger is very cheap, and there are benefits in terms of time and cost savings.
I find the price of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional to be very cost-efficient.
For larger numbers like our case with 1,000 user licenses, JFrog becomes much more cost-effective, roughly ten times cheaper than Sonatype.
 

Valuable Features

PortSwigger Burp Suite is praised for its extensibility, user-friendly tools, and effective vulnerability detection at a competitive price.
Sonatype Lifecycle enhances security with seamless DevOps integration, user-friendly interface, real-time updates, and efficient dependency management.
The most valuable feature of Burp Suite Professional is its ability to schedule tasks for scanning websites.
The most valuable features of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional are its ease of use and its cost efficiency.
I especially value the features for penetration testing.
The integration into our CICD pipeline enables us to continuously monitor code changes and identify new vulnerabilities.
The most valuable feature for us is Sonatype Lifecycle's capability in identifying vulnerabilities.
 

Categories and Ranking

PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (6th), Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
Sonatype Lifecycle
Ranking in Application Security Tools
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (4th), Software Supply Chain Security (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 2.2%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sonatype Lifecycle is 2.6%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Anuradha.Kapoor Kapoor - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers efficient scanning of entire websites but presence of false positive bugs, leading to time-consuming efforts in distinguishing real bugs from false alarms
We have found that so many times, false positive bugs are there, and then we spend a lot of time basically separating them from real bugs. So that's the reason we are looking for some other tool. So we were in discussion with Acunetix. Therefore, the false positive rate is, like, something that we would like to improve. What we are looking for is if this false positive rate goes down because we were OWASP Zap tool users, which was free anyway. But there were a lot of false positives there, and we used to spend a lot of time, like, for security reasons, reproducing those bugs for the development team to fix it. So then we thought, okay, why not we go with the tool? Even if it is not very expensive. But still, every year, we have to renew the license. And we got this tool. Again, we found that in this tool also, even if it is less, there are still a lot of false positive bugs out there. So we again have to spend so much time. So we hired a security tester, who was basically using Acunetix in his previous company for almost three years, and then you said that in that scanning is very slow. The scanning is also slow. Like, sometimes the site scan takes eight hours, six to eight hours. Yeah. And whereas in Acunetix, it took three to four hours. And plus, there are no false positives. I'm not saying none but there's very little. But here, the rate sometimes is very high. These are the two features I think we would like to improve further.
SrinathKuppannan2 - PeerSpot reviewer
Easily identifies problematic versions and ensures adherence to regulatory standards like HIPAA, critical for industries dealing with sensitive information
While Sonatype Lifecycle effectively manages artifacts in Nexus Repository and performs code firewall checks based on rules, it has the potential to expand further. I am looking forward to additional features similar to SonarQube, especially since licenses are often split per component. SonarType could integrate cloud-based capabilities, addressing the increasing shift towards cloud workloads. While there have been demos and discussions around this, significant progress on scanning and analyzing cloud images remains to be seen. I am looking forward to Sonatype incorporating these enhancements, particularly in regard to cloud-based features. On-prem workloads are getting to the cloud workloads. * I would like to see more cloud-related insights, such as logging capabilities for the images we use and image scanning information. * Additionally, it would be beneficial to have insights into the stages of dependencies and ensure they comply with standards. If there are any violations in respect to CVSS reports, * Integrating CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) report rules into the Lifecycle module to detect and report violations would be valuable. I am hoping to see these enhancements from Sonatype in the future. On the security side, I think there's a lot of development needed. There are many security tools on the market, like open-source ones, that Sonatype doesn't integrate with.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
32%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 do you like most about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The solution helped us discover vulnerabilities in our applications.
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.
How does Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle compare with SonarQube?
We like the data that Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle consistently delivers. This solution helps us in fixing and understanding the issues a lot quicker. The policy engine allows you to set up different t...
What do you like most about Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle?
Fortify integrates with various development environments and tools, such as IDEs (Integrated Development Environments) and CI/CD pipelines.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle?
According to my calculations, if you are working with up to 200 developers, Sonatype is cheaper than JFrog. However, for larger numbers like our case with 1,000 user licenses, JFrog becomes much mo...
 

Also Known As

Burp
Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle, Nexus Lifecycle
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
Genome.One, Blackboard, Crediterform, Crosskey, Intuit, Progress Software, Qualys, Liberty Mutual Insurance
Find out what your peers are saying about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs. Sonatype Lifecycle and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.