Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Invicti Logo
5,655 views|4,244 comparisons
91% willing to recommend
NowSecure Logo
554 views|343 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Acunetix and NowSecure 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).
To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: June 2024).
772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
SivaPrakash
AnirudhNair
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple.""I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool.""Acunetix is the best service in the world. It is easy to manage. It gives a lot of information to the users to see and identify problems in their site or applications. It works very well.""The automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment.""Picks up weaknesses in our app setups.""The usability and overall scan results are good.""The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple.""The most valuable feature of the solution is the speed at which it can scan multiple domains in just a few hours."

More Acunetix Pros →

"The most valuable feature is the ability to download an application without actually putting in the APK. It gives us an option to put the APK in if we want to but we can download it from the App Store and Play Store."

More NowSecure Pros →

Cons
"The only problem that they have is the price. It is a bit expensive, and you cannot change the number of applications for the whole year.""We want to see how much bandwidth usage it consumes. When we monitor traffic we have issues with the consumption and throttling of the traffic.""We have had issues during upgrades where their scans worked on some apps better with previous versions. Then, we had to work with their tech support, who were great, to get it fixed for the next version.""The solution can be improved by adding the ability to scan subdomains automatically, and by providing reports that can be exported to external databases to share with other solutions.""I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection.""It should be easier to recreate something manually, with the manual tool, because Acunetix is an automatic tool. If it finds something, it should be easier to manually replicate it. Sometimes you don't get the raw data from the input and output, so that could be improved.""There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others.""Integration into other tools is very limited for Acunetix. While we're trying to incorporate a CI/CD process where we're integrating with JIRA and we're integrating with Jenkins and Chef, it becomes problematic. Other tools give you a high integration capability to connect into different solutions that you may already have, like JIRA."

More Acunetix Cons →

"In this solution, there are two kinds of testing, static analysis, and dynamic analysis. There needs some improvement in testing with dynamic analysis because I have found it is not accurate"

More NowSecure Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "When we looked at all other vendors and what they were asking for, to provide a third of what Acunetix was capable of doing, it was an easy decision... But now that it's coming to a cost where it's line with market value, it becomes more of a competition... Acunetix is raising the cost of licensing. It's 3.5 times what we were initially quoted."
  • "Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."
  • "The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable."
  • "All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."
  • "The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
  • "I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
  • "The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."
  • "When compared with other products, the pricing is a little bit high. But it gives value for the price. It serves the purpose and is worthwhile for the price we pay."
  • More Acunetix Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code.
    Top Answer:There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others.
    Top Answer:We use the product for dynamic analysis. It also helps us to scan web applications.
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    Views
    5,655
    Comparisons
    4,244
    Reviews
    6
    Average Words per Review
    291
    Rating
    8.5
    Views
    554
    Comparisons
    343
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    AcuSensor
    Learn More
    NowSecure
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner is an automated web application security testing tool that audits your web applications by checking for vulnerabilities like SQL Injection, Cross site scripting, and other exploitable vulnerabilities.

    NowSecure experts have conducted advanced pen testing for some of the world's most demanding organizations - including banks, insurance companies, government agencies, healthcare organizations, retail conglomerates, high-tech businesses, and more. Mobile apps are prone to sensitive data leakages and attacks, yet a manual test for just one app can take several weeks. To enable faster, more frequent testing, we built a test engine that successfully automates repeatable and time-consuming mobile appsec testing, remediation and reporting tasks. The result - the foundation of the NowSecure platform, which significantly reduces testing time and costs without compromising full depth of security coverage.

    Sample Customers
    Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
    Vaporstream, FIS, MEA Financial, Silent Circle, Capital One, Citi, EY, EMC, Emerson, Kaiser Permanente, The Home Depot, Humana, Shell, Kellogg's, TD Bank, VMware
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm31%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Media Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company17%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Government9%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm19%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Hospitality Company8%
    Healthcare Company8%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business41%
    Midsize Enterprise19%
    Large Enterprise41%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise19%
    Large Enterprise59%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business23%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise66%
    Buyer's Guide
    Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
    June 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: June 2024.
    772,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Acunetix is ranked 13th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 26 reviews while NowSecure is ranked 33rd in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Acunetix is rated 7.6, while NowSecure is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NowSecure writes "Scalable and reliable, but dynamic analysis needs improvement". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Fortify WebInspect, whereas NowSecure is most compared with Veracode, Data Theorem API Secure , Checkmarx One and GitLab.

    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.