Acunetix vs IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment comparison

Invicti and IBM are both solutions in the Vulnerability Management category. Invicti is ranked #21 with an average rating of 8.3, while IBM is ranked #51. Invicti holds a 1.2% mindshare in VM, compared to IBM’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 50% of IBM users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 31 Acunetix reviews

1,406 Views
1,152 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

IBM Guardium Vulnerability ...

Read 3 IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment reviews

621 Views
464 Comparison Views

50% willing to recommend

Acunetix

IBM Guardium Vulnerability ...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

Acunetix and IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment compete in the cybersecurity domain. Acunetix seems to have the upper hand in pricing and support, while IBM Guardium offers superior features meriting its investment.

Features: Acunetix provides an automated scanner, detailed web application security testing, and is suitable for web-based platforms. IBM Guardium offers comprehensive database security, sensitive data protection, and a data-centric security focus.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix could enhance its database security capabilities, expand its support for non-web application vulnerabilities, and refine its integration with other security tools. IBM Guardium could streamline its setup process, reduce its learning curve for new users, and offer more competitive pricing tiers.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix is known for straightforward setup, user-friendliness, and strong support. IBM Guardium requires more complex integration but provides robust service for implementation support.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix offers a cost-effective solution with a quicker ROI due to competitive pricing. IBM Guardium requires higher initial costs, justified by its extensive feature set, benefiting larger enterprises.

To learn more, read our detailed Acunetix vs. IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 831,265 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Acunetix

Ranking in Vulnerability Management

21st

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (16th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (13th), DevSecOps (6th)

IBM Guardium Vulnerability ...

Ranking in Vulnerability Management

51st

Average Rating

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 1.2%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment is 0.5%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Vulnerability Management

Featured Reviews

AnubhavGoswami

Compliance Manager at Compunnel

Attractive automated reports with boost user productivity and an easy setup

The primary use is mainly related to vulnerability assessment, including both public and internal IP addresses By using this tool, we have reduced the workload and increased the productivity of users. It generates automated reports. This feature is beneficial when sharing reports with clients as…

Read full review

reviewer1714710

CTA\Owner at a tech services company with 11-50 employees

Worthwhile from the regulatory requirements and analytics perspective, but is expensive and not easy to use

We are a full security base integration and application business. We help with implementation and deployments. I used Guardium to help with a cloud migration to check and do some validation for a client's data landscape and services so that they made sure that they were all secure in overall…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."

"Overall, it's a very good tool and a very good engine."

"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."

"The tool's most valuable feature is performance."

"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."

"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 solution is highly stable."

"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."

More Acunetix pros

"It helped with some of the regulatory requirements. It also helped with some of the security analytics and analysis. It was worthwhile from that perspective."

"The reporting features are good and there are many built-in reports that can be quickly configured."

"The most valuable feature is that it provides a simple English recommendation on actions that you need to take once a vulnerability is discovered."

Cons

"Acunetix needs to include agent analysis."

"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."

"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."

"I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection."

"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."

"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 is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."

More Acunetix cons

"The interface could be improved by having sub-groups of tests, ultimately making the process of collecting tests faster."

"Building policies is not that easy. There are some things that are turned off by default, for example, displaying values."

"It was not as easy to use. The user-friendliness of it was somewhat lower than what I was expecting. It was also lacking in terms of the ease of the setup. There should be an automatic agent for deployment."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is exceptionally high."

"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."

"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."

"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."

"Implementing Acunetix needs a medium or larger business agency, because you need some money to get Acunetix. It is costly, but if you care about your agency's security, then maybe it's a cost that might help you in the future."

"It is a bit expensive. If you need to check five applications, you have to pay almost 14,000. It is an agreement for two years at 7,000 per year for only five applications. You cannot change the applications in the license. So, you are stuck with the same license for the five applications for one full year."

"The solution is expensive."

"When we looked at all other vendors and what they were asking for, to provide a third of what Acunetix was capable of doing, it was an easy decision... But now that it's coming to a cost where it's line with market value, it becomes more of a competition... Acunetix is raising the cost of licensing. It's 3.5 times what we were initially quoted."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"One thing not advantageous for it was that it was a little bit more expensive. I would rate it one out of five in terms of pricing."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

37%

Computer Software Company

11%

Insurance Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

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.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

I use Acunetix for penetration testing purposes. This is the primary use case.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

I rate the overall solution nine out of ten. I prefer Acunetix for its more precise and accurate results.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 16% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 12% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 10% of the time

Tenable.io Web Application Scanning vs Acunetix

Compared 8% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix

Compared 6% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

Qualys VMDR vs IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment

Compared 38% of the time

Tenable Nessus vs IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment

Compared 29% of the time

Tenable Vulnerability Management vs IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment

Compared 19% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment

Compared 14% of the time

More IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

January 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

Vulnerability Management

December 2024

IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment report

Download IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

No data available

Learn More

Invicti

IBM

Overview

Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner is an automated web application security testing tool that audits your web applications by checking for vulnerabilities like SQL Injection, Cross site scripting, and other exploitable vulnerabilities.

IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment scans data infrastructures (databases, data warehouses and big data environments) to detect vulnerabilities, and suggests remedial actions. The solution identifies exposures such as missing patches, weak passwords, unauthorized changes and misconfigured privileges.

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment

January 2025

Free Report: Acunetix vs. IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment

Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Acunetix vs. IBM Guardium Vulnerability Assessment 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.