We performed a comparison between Fortify Application Defender 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."The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"The tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"We are able to provide out customers with a secure application after development. They are no longer left wondering if they are vulnerable to different threats within the market following deployment."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."
"The product saves us cost and time."
"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."
"One of the features I like about this program is the low number of false positives and the support it offers."
"Invicti's best feature is the ability to identify vulnerabilities and manually verify them."
"The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan."
"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."
"The scanner and the result generator are valuable features for us."
"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."
"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"The false positive rate should be lower."
"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."
"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."
"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."
"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."
"The custom attack preparation screen might be improved."
"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."
"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."
"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."
"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times. This needs to be looked into."
Fortify Application Defender is ranked 30th in Application Security Tools with 11 reviews while Invicti is ranked 20th in Application Security Tools with 25 reviews. Fortify Application Defender is rated 7.8, while Invicti is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortify Application Defender writes "Useful for fast code review in devOps pipelines ". 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". Fortify Application Defender is most compared with Checkmarx One, Coverity, CAST Application Intelligence Platform, SonarQube and Qualys Web Application Scanning, whereas Invicti is most compared with OWASP Zap, Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Qualys Web Application Scanning and Fortify WebInspect. See our Fortify Application Defender vs. Invicti report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.
