We performed a comparison between HCL AppScan and Invicti 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."You can easily find particular features and functions through the UI."
"AppScan is stable."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Usually when we deploy the application, there is a process for ethical hacking. The main benefit is that, the ethical hacking is almost clean, every time. So it's less cost, less effort, less time to production."
"The HCL AppScan turnaround time for Burp Suite or any new feature request is pretty good, and that is why we are sticking with the HCL."
"For me, as a manager, it was the ease of use. Inserting security into the development process is not normally an easy project to do. The ability for the developer to actually use it and get results and focuses, that's what counted."
"It identifies all the URLs and domains on its own and then performs tests and provides the results."
"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."
"It has a comprehensive resulting mechanism. It is a one-stop solution for all your security testing mechanisms."
"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."
"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."
"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."
"Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms. This feature expands the attack surface."
"Its ability to crawl a web application is quite different than another similar scanner."
"The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan."
"The product has some technical limitations."
"We would like to see a check in the specific vulnerabilities in mobile applications or rooted devices, such as jailbreaking devices."
"It's a little bit basic when you talk about the Web Services. If AppScan improved its maturity on Web Services testing, that would be good."
"I think being able to search across more containers, especially some of the docker elements. We need a little tighter integration there. That's the only thing I can see at this point."
"In future releases, I would like to see more aggressive reports. I would also like to see less false positives."
"The solution needs to improve in some areas. The tool needs to add more languages. It also needs to improve its speed."
"They should have a better UI for dashboards."
"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."
"Asset scanning could be better. Once, it couldn't scan assets, and the issue was strange. The price doesn't fit the budget of small and medium-sized businesses."
"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."
"Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing."
"The support's response time could be faster since we are in different time zones."
"The license could be better. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license. It's a major hindrance that we are facing while scanning applications, and we have to be sure that the URLs are the same and not different so that we do not end up consuming another license for it. Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. The licensing is tied to the URL, and it's restricted. If you have a URL that you scanned once, like a website, you cannot retry that same license. If you are scanning the same website but in a different domain or different URL, you might end up paying for a second license. It would also be better if they provided proper support for multi-factor authentications. In the next release, I would like them to include good multi-factor authentication support."
"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times. This needs to be looked into."
"It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities."
"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."
HCL AppScan is ranked 14th in Application Security Tools with 39 reviews while Invicti is ranked 20th in Application Security Tools with 25 reviews. HCL AppScan is rated 7.6, while Invicti is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HCL AppScan writes " A stable and scalable product useful for application security scanning". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Invicti writes "A customizable security testing solution with good tech support, but the price could be better". HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, Checkmarx One and Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, whereas Invicti is most compared with OWASP Zap, Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning and Veracode. See our HCL AppScan vs. Invicti 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.
