Acunetix vs WhiteHat Dynamic comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Acunetix
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (17th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (13th), Vulnerability Management (15th), DevSecOps (6th)
WhiteHat Dynamic
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (5th)
 

Market share comparison

As of June 2024, in the Application Security Tools category, the market share of Acunetix is 3.5% and it increased by 62.2% compared to the previous year. The market share of WhiteHat Dynamic is 0.6% and it increased by 43.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
Unique Categories:
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
3.0%
Vulnerability Management
2.8%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
6.0%
 

Featured Reviews

SS
Oct 15, 2020
Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning
The scanning speed could be faster. It digs really deep, so that could be one of the reasons why it takes a while. If I want to scan an application, it's going to take over three to four hours. That's something I think they could improve. Instead of posting hundreds of requests to find the vulnerability, if it simply had the capability to find that particular vulnerability in the payload itself, that would make a big impact. The vulnerability identification speed should be improved. It takes more time compared to other tools I have used. Simply put, Acunetix passes too many payloads in order to identify one part of the ratio. That's probably why it can take a while to identify a particular issue. Other tools are able to identify vulnerabilities with just a few requests. Acunetix takes more time to make certain if a vulnerability exists. That's one of the areas which they can improve on. The scan configuration could be improved. The first thing that we need to do is set up a site policy and a scan policy. By site policy, I mean we have to choose what kind of technology our site is developed with so that it will only pass payloads related to that technology. For example, if I'm using MySQL or Python as my backend database, it will only check payloads related to MySQL or Python; it won't check Java or other programming languages. We have to define the scanning configuration as well as the site configuration each and every time. This has to be done whenever we are adding a new set of sites or domains. Other tools provide a list of predefined scan policies, but with Acunetix, we have to create our own every time. We have to spend a lot of time setting up these configurations, rather than just picking them from a vast variety of predefined sets of configurations, which is much easier.
it_user245412 - PeerSpot reviewer
May 28, 2015
The product and customer service is extremely efficient but I would like to see more research and code examples.
The continuous online scanning capabilities and reporting features. The SaaS product features accessible from a browser make managing our online systems easy. The ability to review security items quickly along with being able to retest vulnerabilities on our schedule make the Sentinel product…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

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."
"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."
"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."
"The solution is expensive."
"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
"It is a bit expensive. If you need to check five applications, you have to pay almost 14,000. It is an agreement for two years at 7,000 per year for only five applications. You cannot change the applications in the license. So, you are stuck with the same license for the five applications for one full year."
"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
787,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
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.
What needs improvement with Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others.
What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
We use the product for dynamic analysis. It also helps us to scan web applications.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
Sentinel Dynamic, WhiteHat Security Application Security Testing, Synopsys WhiteHat Dynamic
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: June 2024.
787,383 professionals have used our research since 2012.