Acunetix vs SonarQube comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Acunetix
Ranking in Application Security Tools
17th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
13th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (15th), DevSecOps (6th)
SonarQube
Ranking in Application Security Tools
1st
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Software Development Analytics (1st)
 

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 SonarQube is 27.7% and it decreased by 1.9% 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%
Software Development Analytics
47.2%
 

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.
Devid William - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 23, 2023
An affordable and stable solution that has a variety of features that enable users to improve their products
I work on vulnerability management. I use the security features in SonarQube. I also use Veracode. I use both solutions to verify each other’s results We see the security issues in our solutions with the help of the product. It helps us improve the solutions. There are many options and examples…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."
"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."
"I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."
"The solution is highly stable."
"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."
"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."
"It is a good deal compared to all other tools on the market."
"Code Convention: Using the tool to implement some sort of coding convention is really useful and ensures that the code is consistent no matter how many contributors."
"It assists during the development with SonarLint and helps the developer to change his approach or rather improve his coding pattern or style. That's one advantage I've seen. Another advantage is that we can customize the rules."
"The most valuable function is its usability."
"The most valuable features are the analysis and detection of issues within the application code."
"We can create a Quality Gate in order to fail Jenkins jobs where the code coverage is lower than the set percentage."
"The fact that the solution does security scanning is valuable."
"The code coverage feature is very good."
 

Cons

"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."
"I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection."
"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."
"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."
"When monitoring the traffic we always have issues with the bandwidth consumption and the throttling of traffic."
"The jargon used makes it difficult for project managers to understand the issues, and the technical explanations used make it difficult for developers to understand issues. These things should be simplified much more. That would be very helpful for us when explaining to them what needs to be fixed. The report output needs to be simplified."
"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."
"A better design of the interface and add some new rules."
"This solution finds issues that are similar to what is found by Checkmarx, and it would be nice if the overlap could be eliminated."
"SonarQube needs to improve its support model. They do not work 24/7, and they do not provide weekend support in case things go wrong. They only have a standard 8:00 am to 5:00 pm support model in which you have to raise a support ticket and wait. The support model is not effective for premium customers."
"There could be better integration with other products."
"I think the code security can be improved."
"The solution could improve by providing more advanced technologies."
"An improvement is with false positives. Sometimes the tool can say there is an issue in your code but, really, you have to do things in a certain way due to external dependencies, and I think it's very hard to indicate this is the case."
"I would also like SonarQube to be able to write custom scanning rules. More documentation would be helpful as well because some of our guys were struggling with the customization script."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."
"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."
"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."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable."
"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."
"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
"Implementing Acunetix needs a medium or larger business agency, because you need some money to get Acunetix. It is costly, but if you care about your agency's security, then maybe it's a cost that might help you in the future."
"I do not know about the pricing as I am using the community edition, which is free. But I compared the pricing with Sigma, and it is higher than SonarQube."
"We're using an older version because it is the open-source flavor of it and we can continue using it at no cost. We're not paying any licensing at all, which was another factor in choosing this route so that we can learn and grow with it and not be committed to licenses and other similar things. If we choose to get something else, we have to relearn, but we don't have to relicense. Basically, we're paying no license costs."
"We are using the community version of the solution and we plan on purchasing licenses for the upgraded version soon. There is a limitation on how many lines of code can be scanned and this is why we are going to purchase a license for an increased amount."
"The development license cost is reasonable, and we've had no concerns about SonarQube when it comes to cost."
"Get the paid version which allows the customized dashboard and provides technical support."
"I was using the Community Edition, which is available free of charge."
"It's an open-source solution, with no additional costs."
"The price point on SonarQube is good."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
787,061 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
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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.
Is SonarQube the best tool for static analysis?
I am not very familiar with SonarQube and their solutions, so I can not answer. But if you are asking me about which tools that are the best for for Static Code Analysis, I suggest you have a look...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...
How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?
We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
Sonar
 

Learn More

 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. SonarQube and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.