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.
"Picks up weaknesses in our app setups."
"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."
"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."
"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."
"One of the features that I feel is groundbreaking, that I would like to see expanded on, is the IAS feature: The Interactive Application Security Testing module that gets loaded onto an application on a server, for more in-depth, granular findings. I think that is really neat. I haven't seen a lot of competitors doing that."
"The solution is highly stable."
"The most valuable feature for us is the support for testing Linux-based web server components."
"It's not possible to do penetration testing without being very proficient in Metasploit."
"The option to generate phishing emails has proven to be very valuable in understanding the behavior of users."
"It contains almost all the available exploits and payloads."
"The tool's most useful feature for penetration testing is its automation capabilities. With the professional edition, you can upload the results from Nessus in the Rapid7 Metasploit solution portal."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The solution is open source and has many small targetted penetration tests that have been written by many people that are useful. You can choose different subjects for the test, such as Oracle databases or Apache servers."
"The reporting on the solution is good."
"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."
"We have had issues during upgrades where their scans worked on some apps better with previous versions. Then, we had to work with their tech support, who were great, to get it fixed for the next version."
"It should be easier to recreate something manually, with the manual tool, because Acunetix is an automatic tool. If it finds something, it should be easier to manually replicate it. Sometimes you don't get the raw data from the input and output, so that could be improved."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."
"Acunetix needs to include agent analysis."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to see more capabilities, more functions, and more features. More types of attack vectors."
"I think areas with shortcomings that need improvement are more integration and automation."
"Rapid7 Metasploit can add a GUI feature because it is only available online."
"Better automation capabilities would be an improvement."
"It is necessary to add some training materials and a tutorial for beginners."
"We'd like them to offer better coverage of malware."
"Rapid7 Metasploit could be made easier for new users to learn."
"Advanced Infrastructure should be implemented in the next release for better orchestration."
Acunetix is ranked 14th in Vulnerability Management with 26 reviews while Rapid7 Metasploit is ranked 11th 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 Wireshark. 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.
