We performed a comparison between Invicti and Veracode 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."The scanner and the result generator are valuable features for us."
"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."
"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."
"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."
"I am impressed with Invictus’ proof-based scanning. The solution has reduced the incidence of false positive vulnerabilities. It has helped us reduce our time and focus on vulnerabilities."
"This tool is really fast and the information that they provide on vulnerabilities is pretty good."
"The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan."
"It correctly parses DOM and JS and has really good support for URL Rewrite rules, which is important for today's websites."
"The most valuable feature is the remediation consulting that they give. I feel like any vendor can identify the flaws but fixing the flaws is what is most important. Being able to have those consultation calls, schedule them in the platform, and have that discussion with an applications expert, that process scales well and that is what has allowed a lot more reduction of risk to happen."
"The security team can track the remediation and risk acceptance statistics."
"The most valuable feature is Veracode SDP, which allows for something related to third-party vulnerabilities. When we build a product, we use a lot of third-party libraries instead of building everything from scratch. We just use a library which is already been built; we just use that component in our product. Sometimes, these libraries may have bugs or issues, and it's hard to keep track of them because we use thousands of them."
"From a developer's perspective, Veracode's greenlight feature on the IDE is helpful. It helps the developer to be more proactive in secure coding standards. Apart from that, static analysis scanning is definitely one of the top features of Veracode."
"The user interface is excellent, the code review process is quick and provides great analytics to understand our code better, and the SAST scan is high-speed."
"Provides the capability to track remediation and the handling of identified vulnerabilities."
"Because it is a SaaS offering, I do not have to support the infrastructure."
"The dashboards and the threat insights it provides are very good. The dashboards are intuitive and pretty straightforward, but also pretty detailed."
"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."
"The solution needs to make a more specific report."
"The license could be better. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license. It's a major hindrance that we are facing while scanning applications, and we have to be sure that the URLs are the same and not different so that we do not end up consuming another license for it. Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. The licensing is tied to the URL, and it's restricted. If you have a URL that you scanned once, like a website, you cannot retry that same license. If you are scanning the same website but in a different domain or different URL, you might end up paying for a second license. It would also be better if they provided proper support for multi-factor authentications. In the next release, I would like them to include good multi-factor authentication support."
"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."
"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."
"Reporting should be improved. The reporting options should be made better for end-users. Currently, it is possible, but it's not the best. Being able to choose what I want to see in my reports rather than being given prefixed information would make my life easier. I had to depend on the API for getting the content that I wanted. If they could fix the reporting feature to make it more comprehensive and user-friendly, it would help a lot of end-users. Everything else was good about this product."
"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."
"Maybe the ability to make a good reporting format is needed."
"Scheduling can be a little difficult. For instance, if you set up recurring scheduled scans and a developer comes in and says, "Hey, I have this critical release that happened outside of our normal release patterns and they want you to scan it," we actually have to change our schedule configuration and that means we lose the recurring scheduling settings we had."
"It's problematic if you want to integrate it with your pipelines because the documentation is not so well written and it's full of typos. It is not presented in a structured way. It does not say, "If you want to achieve this particular thing, you have to do steps 1, 2, and 3." Instead, it contains bits of information in different parts, and you have to read everything and then understand the big picture."
"Veracode Static Analysis can improve the false positive. There are always improvements that can be done to the false positive rate. There are some things that get flagged that are not an issue. However, it is not a huge concern."
"The interface is one thing I find a little challenging. Veracode's interface feels a little outdated compared to other solutions, and it could be modernized. I'm mostly happy with the features, but Vercaode could add Docker image scanning."
"Reporting. Some of the reporting features of Veracode do need improvement. They do not have the most robust access to data. That would be a bit more beneficial to a lot of our clients as well as our actual in-house staff. I've been talking to our program management at Veracode about that, and that is actually on their radar to have that improved, I think actually this year."
"Ideally, I would like better reporting that gives me a more concise and accurate description of what my pain points are, and how to get to them."
"We would like the consolidation of all the different modules. This would help, so then we would be able to see analytics and results on one screen, like a single pane of glass."
"Veracode doesn't really help you so much when it comes to fixing things. It is able to find our vulnerabilities but the remediation activities it does provide are not a straight out-of-the-box kind of model. We need to work on remediation and not completely rely on Veracode."
Invicti is ranked 20th in Application Security Tools with 25 reviews while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Application Security Tools with 194 reviews. Invicti is rated 8.2, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Invicti writes "A customizable security testing solution with good tech support, but the price could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veracode writes "Helps to reduce false positives and prevent vulnerable code from entering production, but does not support incremental scanning ". Invicti is most compared with OWASP Zap, Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Qualys Web Application Scanning and Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Fortify Static Code Analyzer. See our Invicti vs. Veracode 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.
