We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Qualys VMDR 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."Acunetix is the best service in the world. It is easy to manage. It gives a lot of information to the users to see and identify problems in their site or applications. It works very well."
"It can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."
"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."
"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."
"The automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment."
"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."
"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."
"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."
"Performs automated, regular scans in the network."
"There are fewer false positives when using this solution."
"Qualys VM's best features are vulnerability management and customizable scoring."
"Provides great functionality."
"The solution shows us classic categories, including high, medium, and low risks. It also shows critical items, and that gives us the advantage of prioritizing things."
"The initial setup was good. We didn't have any problems with it."
"The most valuable feature is automation."
"Tech support is helpful."
"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."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."
"There's a clear need for a reduction in pricing to make the service more accessible."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It would be nice to have an all-in-one solution that was automated and could handle the scanning and reports as well as the patching and updating."
"I would like to have CSPM, a continuous scan-like cloud added to the solution."
"The solution is a bit expensive if you do not have access to discounts."
"Qualys Container Security can improve the interface. It could be easier to navigate and be enriched."
"The reporting and dashboards could improve in Qualys VM. However, they have improved since the previous versions."
"Sometimes the scanning can get overwhelmed and start to drag when a lot of users are trying to scan at once."
"Qualys does have an on-prem solution, but it is very expensive."
"Qualys VM's machine learning and artificial intelligence features could be improved."
Acunetix is ranked 16th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while Qualys VMDR is ranked 3rd in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management with 77 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Qualys VMDR is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qualys VMDR writes "Good visibility but expensive and needs better support". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Qualys VMDR is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center, Rapid7 InsightVM, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tenable Vulnerability Management. See our Acunetix vs. Qualys VMDR report.
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.
