We performed a comparison between Acunetix and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional 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 vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The most important feature is that it's a web-based graphical user interface. That is a great addition. Also, the ability to schedule scans is great."
"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 solution is highly stable."
"The usability and overall scan results are good."
"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."
"I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."
"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."
"The most valuable features are Burp Intruder and Burp Scanner."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is one of the best user-friendly solutions for getting the proxy set up."
"The solution is quite helpful for session management and configuration."
"With the Extender Tab, if you know how to code then you can create a plugin and add it to Burp."
"The extension that it provides with the community version for the skills mapping is excellent."
"The solution helped us discover vulnerabilities in our applications."
"The intercepting feature is the most valuable."
"The initial setup is simple."
"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's a clear need for a reduction in pricing to make the service more accessible."
"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."
"The solution can be improved by adding the ability to scan subdomains automatically, and by providing reports that can be exported to external databases to share with other solutions."
"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."
"We want to see how much bandwidth usage it consumes. When we monitor traffic we have issues with the consumption and throttling of the traffic."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."
"I would like to see a more optimized solution, as it currently uses a lot of CPU power and memory."
"The biggest improvement that I would like to see from PortSwigger that today many people see as an issue in their testing. There might be a feature which might be desired."
"There were a lot of false positives there, and we used to spend a lot of time, like, for security reasons, reproducing those bugs for the development team to fix it."
"A lot of our interns find it difficult to get used to PortSwigger Burp's environment."
"We wish that the Spider feature would appear in the same shape that it does in previous versions."
"The use of system memory is an area that can be improved because it uses a lot."
"The solution doesn't offer very good scalability."
"I need the solution to be more user-friendly. The solution needs to be user-friendly."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Acunetix is ranked 16th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 9th in Application Security Tools with 55 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional writes "The solution is versatile and easy to deploy, but it needs to give more detailed security reports". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, HCL AppScan, Fortify WebInspect and Veracode, whereas PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, HCL AppScan, Qualys Web Application Scanning and SonarQube. See our Acunetix vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) 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.