Acunetix vs Synopsys API Security Testing comparison

Invicti and Black Duck are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.3, while Black Duck is ranked #39. Invicti holds a 3.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to Black Duck’s 0.1% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Black Duck users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 32 Acunetix reviews

4,309 Views
3,462 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

Synopsys API Security Testing

Read 1 Synopsys API Security Testing review

220 Views
169 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Acunetix

Synopsys API Security Testing

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Synopsys API Security Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST).

To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 847,862 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 Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

14th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (17th), Vulnerability Management (23rd), DevSecOps (6th)

Synopsys API Security Testing

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

39th

Average Rating

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 3.5%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Synopsys API Security Testing is 0.1%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

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

UmarQureshi

Security Lead at a retailer with 10,001+ employees

Useful threat vectors, beneficial results, but implementation needed support

We are using Synopsys API Security Testing for scanning APIs for risks and vulnerabilities and to understand our posture before deployment within our business The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares. I have been…

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

"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."

"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."

"The solution is highly stable."

"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."

"The features of Acunetix have proved most effective in identifying vulnerabilities."

"Picks up weaknesses in our app setups."

"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."

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

More Acunetix pros

"The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares."

Cons

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

"The cost can be reduced as management has noted it to be on the higher side."

"You can't actually change your password after you've set it unless you go back into the administration account and you change it there. Thus, if you're locked out and don't remember your password, that's a thing."

"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."

"There was an issue related to updates from the internet."

"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."

"It is difficult to create a proxy connection."

"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."

More Acunetix cons

"The solution required us to use our team and we spoke to Synopsys API Security Testing's support to do the implementation. We use two people from our team for the implementation. and one person for maintenance."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."

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

"The price is exceptionally high."

"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 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."

"When compared with other products, the pricing is a little bit high. But it gives value for the price. It serves the purpose and is worthwhile for the price we pay."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

22%

Financial Services Firm

20%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Insurance Company

11%

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 typically use Acunetix ( /products/acunetix-reviews ) to identify vulnerabilities for clients.

See all answers

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

I would recommend Acunetix to others. Overall, I rate this solution seven out of ten.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 17% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 12% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 9% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 7% of the time

Tenable.io Web Application Scanning vs Acunetix

Compared 6% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

Invicti vs Synopsys API Security Testing

Compared 57% of the time

Seeker vs Synopsys API Security Testing

Compared 43% of the time

More Synopsys API Security Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

April 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

April 2025

Download Synopsys API Security Testing product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

No data available

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.

Invicti

AppSec testing optimized for the needs of API developers
APIs provide open, flexible interfaces that enable applications and services to talk to each other. But these characteristics can also make it difficult to build secure software—and even more difficult for traditional AppSec tools to test it.

Black Duck

Sample Customers

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

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

April 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.