We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Invicti based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"We are able to create a report which shows the PCI DSS scoring and share it with the application teams. Then, they can correlate and see exactly what they need to fix, and why."
"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The usability and overall scan results are good."
"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."
"The tool's most valuable feature is performance."
"The most important feature is that it's a web-based graphical user interface. That is a great addition. Also, the ability to schedule scans is great."
"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."
"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."
"The scanner is light on the network and does not impact the network when scans are running."
"Its ability to crawl a web application is quite different than another similar scanner."
"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."
"It has a comprehensive resulting mechanism. It is a one-stop solution for all your security testing mechanisms."
"Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms. This feature expands the attack surface."
"Invicti's best feature is the ability to identify vulnerabilities and manually verify them."
"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."
"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."
"When monitoring the traffic we always have issues with the bandwidth consumption and the throttling of traffic."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
"Currently only supports web scanning."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"Acunetix needs to be dynamic with JavaScript code, unlike Netsparker which can scan complex agents."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"Asset scanning could be better. Once, it couldn't scan assets, and the issue was strange. The price doesn't fit the budget of small and medium-sized businesses."
"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 scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."
"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."
"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."
"The proxy review, the use report views, the current use tool and the subset requests need some improvement. It was hard to understand how to use them."
"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times. This needs to be looked into."
"The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker."
Acunetix is ranked 17th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while Invicti is ranked 20th in Application Security Tools with 25 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Invicti is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Invicti writes "A customizable security testing solution with good tech support, but the price could be better". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and SonarQube, whereas Invicti is most compared with OWASP Zap, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Qualys Web Application Scanning, Veracode and Fortify WebInspect. See our Acunetix vs. Invicti report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
