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.
"The tool's most valuable feature is performance."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"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."
"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."
"I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."
"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."
"It contains almost all the available exploits and payloads."
"The reporting on the solution is good."
"It's not possible to do penetration testing without being very proficient in Metasploit."
"I use Rapid7 Metasploit for payload generation and Post-Exploitation."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the scripts, the modules, and the tools that the Rapid7 Metasploit framework has."
"Technical support has been helpful and responsive."
"The greatest advantage of Rapid7 Metasploit is that it is the only system that can directly exploit vulnerabilities on the Metasploit platform."
"All of the features are great."
"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."
"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."
"Integration into other tools is very limited for Acunetix. While we're trying to incorporate a CI/CD process where we're integrating with JIRA and we're integrating with Jenkins and Chef, it becomes problematic. Other tools give you a high integration capability to connect into different solutions that you may already have, like JIRA."
"Acunetix needs to be dynamic with JavaScript code, unlike Netsparker which can scan complex agents."
"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."
"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."
"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."
"The solution should improve the responsiveness of its live technical support."
"Better automation capabilities would be an improvement."
"There are numerous outdated exploits in their database that should be updated."
"I think areas with shortcomings that need improvement are more integration and automation."
"At the time I was using it, the graphical user interface needed some improvements."
"I would like to see more capabilities, more functions, and more features. More types of attack vectors."
"Rapid7 Metasploit can add a GUI feature because it is only available online."
"The open-source version has reporting limitations. You need to develop these capabilities yourself. Built-in reporting is an excellent feature for penetration testing, but it isn't a must-have. The solution could also cover more vulnerabilities. Metasploit has around 10,000 exploits in its library, but more is always better."
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.