We performed a comparison between Rapid7 Metasploit and Acunetix based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Result: Based on the parameters we compared, Acunetix comes out ahead of Rapid7 Metasploit. Although both products have valuable features and can be estimated as high-end solutions, our reviewers found that Rapid7 Metasploit requires technical understanding for deployment and the free version lacks technical support.
"It can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."
"Overall, it's a very good tool and a very good engine."
"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."
"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."
"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."
"The scalability is good. The scalability is more than good because it can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated as part of applications. So that really makes it a very, very versatile solution to have."
"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"Acunetix has an awesome crawler. It gives a referral site map of near targets and also goes really deep to find all the inputs without issues. This was valuable because it helped me find some files or directories, like web admin panels without authentication, which were hidden."
"Rapid7 Metasploit is a useful product."
"I don't have any other tools like it, and I always use it when I'm doing a pen test. Metasploit is a great solution for penetration testing,"
"It's not possible to do penetration testing without being very proficient in Metasploit."
"It contains almost all the available exploits and payloads."
"The option to generate phishing emails has proven to be very valuable in understanding the behavior of users."
"The reporting on the solution is good."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the scripts, the modules, and the tools that the Rapid7 Metasploit framework has."
"All of the features are great."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."
"Currently only supports web scanning."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us."
"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."
"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."
"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."
"It would be nice to have a feature to "retest" only a single vulnerability that the customer reports as patched, and delete it from the next scans since it has already been patched."
"Advanced Infrastructure should be implemented in the next release for better orchestration."
"It is necessary to add some training materials and a tutorial for beginners."
"I think areas with shortcomings that need improvement are more integration and automation."
"There are numerous outdated exploits in their database that should be updated."
"I would like to see more capabilities, more functions, and more features. More types of attack vectors."
"Better automation capabilities would be an improvement."
"The solution is not user-friendly and has room for improvement."
"At the time I was using it, the graphical user interface needed some improvements."
Acunetix is ranked 15th in Vulnerability Management with 26 reviews while Rapid7 Metasploit is ranked 12th in Vulnerability Management with 18 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Rapid7 Metasploit is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rapid7 Metasploit writes "Helps find vulnerabilities in a system to determine whether the system needs to be upgraded". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Rapid7 AppSpider, whereas Rapid7 Metasploit is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Pentera, Rapid7 InsightVM, Nucleus and Qualys VMDR. See our Acunetix vs. Rapid7 Metasploit report.
See our list of best Vulnerability Management vendors.
We monitor all Vulnerability Management 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.
