We performed a comparison between Acunetix and PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Vulnerability Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."
"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."
"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."
"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."
"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."
"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."
"Parallel scans can be done with PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The product's initial setup phase was super easy."
"The tool is loaded with many features that give us ROI."
"I like normal dynamic scanning, general web applications scanning, and vulnerability assessments."
"The most valuable features of PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition are the vast amount of options and ease of use. They frequently improve the solution every six months to a year. Additionally, if we want any more features we can upload a custom script to meet our needs."
"The product is easy to use."
"We are in the early stage of using the solution making it difficult to fully determine the best features. However, we have noticed the CMDB and device discovery features look valuable at this time."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"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."
"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."
"When monitoring the traffic we always have issues with the bandwidth consumption and the throttling of traffic."
"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 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."
"The stability of the scans could be improved."
"The implementation of the solution is quite complicated and could be easier."
"The product needs to have the ability to evaluate more."
"The cost per license per user could be cheaper, specifically for individual licensing."
"There's definitely room for improvement. There are lots of false positives. Once I do the manual assessment, it comes as a false positive. They need to improve the Enterprise Edition, especially the part that gives false positives."
"There are features or functionality missing, but PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition does try to update frequently to alleviate the shortcomings."
"It would be better if the solution is cloud-based."
"The solution is a bit expensive."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition Pricing and Cost Advice →
Acunetix is ranked 14th in Vulnerability Management with 26 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition is ranked 12th in Vulnerability Management with 8 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition writes " With a super easy initial setup phase, the tool also offers regular updates". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Invicti, whereas PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Rapid7 Metasploit, Tenable Vulnerability Management, Rapid7 InsightVM and Qualys VMDR. See our Acunetix vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition 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.
