Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
Acunetix Logo

Top 10 Acunetix Alternatives

Vendor: Invicti
3.9 out of 5
1,601 followers
Post review

Top Acunetix Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Acunetix based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube), GitLab, and Snyk. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.

Acunetix surpasses its competitors by offering comprehensive vulnerability scanning, advanced automation capabilities, and seamless integration with popular development tools, delivering efficient, accurate, and secure web application security solutions for businesses of all sizes.

Invicti Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Invicti, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Acunetix Logo
Acunetix Logo
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube)
4.0 out of 5
Acunetix focuses on web-based security with real-time assessments, appealing to those needing deep vulnerability insights. In comparison, SonarQube Server emphasizes code quality and CI/CD integration, attracting development teams seeking comprehensive code analysis and quality improvement across multiple languages.
Download Acunetix vs. SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) Report
Acunetix involves an initial setup cost that is higher compared to SonarQube Server, which offers a more budget-friendly setup, making them suitable for different financial considerations.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
Acunetix involves an initial setup cost that is higher compared to SonarQube Server, which offers a more budget-friendly setup, making them suitable for different financial considerations.
Acunetix Logo
GitLab
4.3 out of 5
Acunetix Logo
GitLab
4.3 out of 5
Acunetix excels in vulnerability detection, offering robust security scanning and competitive pricing. In comparison, GitLab provides an integrated DevOps platform, featuring extensive development tools and version control, justifying higher costs with comprehensive long-term ROI for larger projects.
Download Acunetix vs. GitLab Report
Acunetix generally incurs a higher setup cost than GitLab, offering a broad range of features suitable for comprehensive security testing, whereas GitLab presents a more budget-friendly option with valuable integration capabilities for development workflows.
View comparison
Pricing
Acunetix generally incurs a higher setup cost than GitLab, offering a broad range of features suitable for comprehensive security testing, whereas GitLab presents a more budget-friendly option with valuable integration capabilities for development workflows.
Acunetix Logo
Snyk
4.1 out of 5
Acunetix Logo
Snyk
4.1 out of 5
Acunetix provides dynamic vulnerability analysis and is appreciated for customer service. In comparison, Snyk integrates seamlessly with developer workflows and delivers comprehensive open-source scanning, offering a high ROI. Acunetix's cost-effectiveness attracts buyers, while Snyk's extensive features justify its pricing.
Download Acunetix vs. Snyk Report
Acunetix has a higher initial setup cost, while Snyk's setup is more affordable, allowing for a cost-effective entry.
View comparison
Pricing
Acunetix has a higher initial setup cost, while Snyk's setup is more affordable, allowing for a cost-effective entry.
Acunetix Logo
Checkmarx One
3.8 out of 5
Acunetix Logo
Checkmarx One
3.8 out of 5
Acunetix offers fast scanning and broad web technology compatibility, appealing to those prioritizing quick deployment and affordability. In comparison, Checkmarx One provides robust language support and integration flexibility, attracting organizations seeking long-term ROI from extensive feature sets and integration capabilities.
Download Acunetix vs. Checkmarx One Report
Acunetix has a moderate setup cost, while Checkmarx One presents a higher initial expense.
View comparison
Pricing
Acunetix has a moderate setup cost, while Checkmarx One presents a higher initial expense.
Acunetix Logo
Veracode
4.1 out of 5
Acunetix Logo
Veracode
4.1 out of 5
Veracode offers seamless integration and comprehensive scanning, ideal for those prioritizing strong deployment support. In comparison, Acunetix provides advanced vulnerability detection, suited for detailed security assessments. Acunetix's competitive pricing offers quick ROI, whereas Veracode delivers long-term return potential despite higher initial costs.
Download Acunetix vs. Veracode Report
Veracode's setup cost can be relatively high, reflecting its robust enterprise model, while Acunetix offers a more budget-friendly setup, catering better to smaller businesses.
View comparison
Pricing
Veracode's setup cost can be relatively high, reflecting its robust enterprise model, while Acunetix offers a more budget-friendly setup, catering better to smaller businesses.
Acunetix Logo
Fortify on Demand
4.0 out of 5
Acunetix Logo
Fortify on Demand
4.0 out of 5
Acunetix is favored for ease of use and cost-effectiveness, ideal for small enterprises needing quick ROI. In comparison, Fortify on Demand attracts those seeking extensive security features and comprehensive reporting, justifying its higher cost with substantial insights for detailed deployments.
Download Acunetix vs. Fortify on Demand Report
Acunetix has a lower setup cost, making it a more budget-friendly option, while Fortify on Demand offers a higher setup cost but may provide robust features that justify the investment for some users.
View comparison
Pricing
Acunetix has a lower setup cost, making it a more budget-friendly option, while Fortify on Demand offers a higher setup cost but may provide robust features that justify the investment for some users.
Acunetix Logo
Sonatype Lifecycle
4.2 out of 5
Acunetix Logo
Sonatype Lifecycle
4.2 out of 5
Acunetix offers robust vulnerability scanning for web applications, appealing to those prioritizing security. In comparison, Sonatype Lifecycle excels in managing open source components, attracting buyers focused on comprehensive integration and dependency management features. Each addresses distinct needs in cybersecurity.
Download Acunetix vs. Sonatype Lifecycle Report
Acunetix has a lower setup cost compared to Sonatype Lifecycle, making it a more cost-effective choice for initial deployment, while Sonatype Lifecycle may offer more comprehensive integration features justifying its higher setup cost.
View comparison
Pricing
Acunetix has a lower setup cost compared to Sonatype Lifecycle, making it a more cost-effective choice for initial deployment, while Sonatype Lifecycle may offer more comprehensive integration features justifying its higher setup cost.
Acunetix Logo
Acunetix Logo
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional
4.3 out of 5
Acunetix offers efficient automated scanning and cost-effectiveness suitable for quick deployment. In comparison, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional excels in detailed manual testing, preferred for long-term use despite a higher initial investment due to its extensive features and integration capabilities.
Download Acunetix vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Report
Acunetix has a moderate setup cost, emphasizing affordability, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional has a higher setup cost, reflecting its premium features.
View comparison
Pricing
Acunetix has a moderate setup cost, emphasizing affordability, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional has a higher setup cost, reflecting its premium features.
Acunetix Logo
HCL AppScan
3.9 out of 5
Acunetix Logo
HCL AppScan
3.9 out of 5
HCL AppScan is ideal for those seeking comprehensive platform scanning and robust integration features. In comparison, Acunetix offers advanced scanning features with broad language support. Both products cater to different needs, making them suitable for distinct vulnerability management requirements.
Download Acunetix vs. HCL AppScan Report
HCL AppScan has a higher initial setup cost compared to Acunetix, which offers a more budget-friendly setup, making it suitable for businesses with cost constraints.
View comparison
Pricing
HCL AppScan has a higher initial setup cost compared to Acunetix, which offers a more budget-friendly setup, making it suitable for businesses with cost constraints.
Acunetix Logo
Acunetix Logo
Qualys Web Application Scanning
3.9 out of 5
Qualys Web Application Scanning impresses with comprehensive vulnerability detection, real-time monitoring, and DevOps integration. In comparison, Acunetix appeals with swift scanning, detailed SQL injection detection, and an easy setup. Both offer robust reporting but differ in pricing and deployment options.
Download Acunetix vs. Qualys Web Application Scanning Report
Qualys Web Application Scanning has a straightforward setup cost, while Acunetix offers a more variable pricing structure, highlighting a significant difference in initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Qualys Web Application Scanning has a straightforward setup cost, while Acunetix offers a more variable pricing structure, highlighting a significant difference in initial investment.
Acunetix Logo
Acunetix Logo
Tenable.io Web Application Scanning
3.9 out of 5
Acunetix is preferred for competitive pricing and ease of integration, appealing to budget-conscious buyers. In comparison, Tenable.io offers advanced analytics and comprehensive features, attracting customers who prioritize robust functionality despite higher costs. Acunetix excels in user support, while Tenable.io provides superior threat identification.
Download Acunetix vs. Tenable.io Web Application Scanning Report
Acunetix incurs a higher setup cost, while Tenable.io Web Application Scanning offers a more economical alternative.
View comparison
Pricing
Acunetix incurs a higher setup cost, while Tenable.io Web Application Scanning offers a more economical alternative.
Acunetix Logo
Acunetix Logo
Fortify Application Defender
3.9 out of 5
Acunetix offers cost-effective pricing and seamless integration with DevOps for efficient security scanning. In comparison, Fortify Application Defender provides advanced real-time application protection. Tech buyers may prefer Acunetix for affordability or Fortify for comprehensive security features and substantial ROI.
Download Acunetix vs. Fortify Application Defender Report
Acunetix has a straightforward setup cost, while Fortify Application Defender involves a more complex setup process.
View comparison
Pricing
Acunetix has a straightforward setup cost, while Fortify Application Defender involves a more complex setup process.
Acunetix Logo
Acunetix Logo
Contrast Security Assess
4.4 out of 5
Acunetix offers comprehensive pricing and support with dynamic analysis capabilities, ideal for businesses seeking accessible solutions. In comparison, Contrast Security Assess provides superior integration and continuous monitoring, appealing to those prioritizing seamless workflows and long-term ROI despite higher initial costs.
Download Acunetix vs. Contrast Security Assess Report
Acunetix has a lower setup cost, making it more accessible for smaller budgets, while Contrast Security Assess requires a higher initial investment, reflecting its advanced features and integrations.
View comparison
Pricing
Acunetix has a lower setup cost, making it more accessible for smaller budgets, while Contrast Security Assess requires a higher initial investment, reflecting its advanced features and integrations.
Acunetix Logo
Acunetix Logo
Contrast Security Protect
4.2 out of 5
Acunetix excels in vulnerability detection for diverse web applications, attracting users focused on scanning capabilities. In comparison, Contrast Security Protect offers real-time protection and easy integration into development workflows, appealing to buyers investing in protection seamlessly integrated throughout the development process.
Download Acunetix vs. Contrast Security Protect Report
Acunetix has a lower setup cost compared to Contrast Security Protect, offering more budget-friendly initial expenditure. Contrast Security Protect, however, requires a higher setup investment, potentially delivering advanced security features and additional benefits.
View comparison
Pricing
Acunetix has a lower setup cost compared to Contrast Security Protect, offering more budget-friendly initial expenditure. Contrast Security Protect, however, requires a higher setup investment, potentially delivering advanced security features and additional benefits.
Acunetix Logo
w3af
4.0 out of 5
Acunetix Logo
w3af
4.0 out of 5
w3af is a Web Application Attack and Audit Framework. The project's goal is to create a framework to help you secure your web applications by finding and exploiting all web application vulnerabilities. Our framework is proudly developed using Python to be easy to use and extend, and licensed under GPLv2.0.
View comparison
Acunetix Logo
Syhunt Hybrid
1 out of 5
Acunetix Logo
Syhunt Hybrid
1 out of 5

Syhunt Hybrid is a powerful tool designed to assess and secure web applications. With its comprehensive scanning capabilities, it effectively identifies vulnerabilities and conducts penetration testing to ensure the overall security of web applications. 

Users have praised its ability to scan various web applications and networks, providing thorough analysis and identifying potential vulnerabilities. The efficient detection of vulnerabilities is highly valued, as it helps users address security issues promptly. 

Additionally, the user-friendly interface of Syhunt Hybrid allows for easy navigation and effective utilization of the tool. 

View comparison

Related categories

Application Security Tools
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Vulnerability Management