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

Acunetix vs SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 30, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Acunetix
Ranking in Application Security Tools
12th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (17th), DevSecOps (5th)
SonarQube Server (formerly ...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
1st
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Software Development Analytics (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.5%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) is 26.7%, down from 27.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

AnubhavGoswami - PeerSpot reviewer
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…
Wang Dayong - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages
The product provides false reports sometimes. It also fails to understand the context of the code. It reports that a line of code has issues without considering its relation with the previous line. The product should improve the report quality. While it asks us to improve the code quality, it would be good if it also suggests how to improve the quality.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The solution is highly stable."
"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 most valuable feature of the solution is the speed at which it can scan multiple domains in just a few hours."
"The usability and overall scan results are good."
"By integrating with CI/CD tools, it enables a shift-left approach in the development process."
"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."
"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."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, easy to access, and they provide good training files."
"One of the most valuable features of SonarQube is its ability to detect code quality during development. There are rules that define various technologies—Java, C#, Python, everything—and these rules declare the coding standards and code quality. With SonarQube, everything is detectable during the time of development and continuous integration, which is an advantage. SonarQube also has a Quality Gate, where the code should reach 85%. Below that, the code cannot be promoted to a further environment, it should be in a development environment only. So the checks are there, and SonarQube will provide that increase. It also provides suggestions on how the code can be fixed and methods of going about this, without allowing hackers to exploit the code. Another valuable feature is that it is tightly integrated with third-party tools. For example, we can see the SonarQube metrics in Bitbucket, the code repository. Once I raise the full request, the developer, team lead, or even the delivery lead can see the code quality metrics of the deliverable so that they can make a decision. SonarQube will also cover all of the top OWASP vulnerabilities, however it doesn't have penetration testing or hacker testing. We use other tools, like Checkmarx, to do penetration testing from the outside."
"The integrations SonarQube provides with our software delivery pipeline are very seamless."
"This solution has helped with the integration and building of our CICD pipeline."
"SonarQube is admin friendly."
"SonarQube is useful for controlling all of our Azure task tracking and scanning."
"I like that it covers most programming languages for source code review."
"Apart from the security point of view, I like that it makes it easy to detect code smells and other issues in terms of code quality and standards."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"When monitoring the traffic we always have issues with the bandwidth consumption and the throttling of traffic."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing."
"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."
"There was an issue related to updates from the internet."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."
"The product provides false reports sometimes."
"SonarQube could be improved by implementing inter-procedural code analysis capabilities, allowing for a more comprehensive detection of defects and vulnerabilities across the entire codebase."
"The handling of the contents of Docker container images could be better."
"In terms of analysis and findings, other tools provide more in-depth insights and detailed steps to mitigate or handle issues."
"One thing to improve would be the integration. There is a steep learning curve to get it integrated."
"Their dashboarding is very limited. They can improve their dashboards for multiple areas, such as security review, maintainability, etc. They have all this information, so they should publish all this information on the dashboard so that the users can view the summary and then analyze it further. This is something that I would like to see in the next version."
"The implementation of the solution is straightforward. However, we did have some initial initialization issues at the of the projects. I don't think it was SonarQube's fault. It was the way it was implemented in our organization because it's mainly integrated with many software, such as Jira, Confluence, and Butler."
"Code security scanning could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."
"The solution is expensive."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable."
"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 costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."
"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
"Get the paid version which allows the customized dashboard and provides technical support."
"We are using the Community edition of SonarQube."
"This solution is free."
"We are using the open-source community version, but there are enterprise licenses available."
"The beauty of this solution is the free open-source version is capable enough in doing pretty much what an enterprise-level version can do."
"There is both a free and licensed version. The free version has limitations on development languages and support."
"SonarQube price is a little bit higher than Kiuwan's. Kiuwan also gives a little bit of flexibility in terms of pricing."
"I use the full trial version of SonarQube."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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.
What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
I use Acunetix for penetration testing purposes. This is the primary use case.
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.
Is SonarQube the best tool for static analysis?
I am not very familiar with SonarQube and their solutions, so I can not answer. But if you are asking me about which tools that are the best for for Static Code Analysis, I suggest you have a look...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...
How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?
We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...
 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
Sonar
 

Learn More

 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.