No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Fortify Application Defender vs Invicti comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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

Fortify Application Defender
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (33rd)
Invicti
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (12th), Container Security (26th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (10th), API Security (10th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Fortify Application Defender and Invicti aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Fortify Application Defender is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.5%, up 0.7% compared to last year.
Invicti, on the other hand, focuses on Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), holds 8.5% mindshare, up 6.9% since last year.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Fortify Application Defender1.5%
SonarQube12.4%
Checkmarx One8.2%
Other77.9%
Application Security Tools
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Invicti8.5%
Veracode14.5%
Checkmarx One14.2%
Other62.8%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

Featured Reviews

VS
CTO at Abcl
Useful for fast code review in devOps pipelines
I rate the tool's scalability a seven out of ten. However, I'm concerned about how it handles an increasing number of lines of code. As the complexity grows, so does the time it takes for the tool to review everything. I want more clarity on how Fortify Application Defender handles multiple threats. We have numerous endpoints, but the tool runs in our pipeline, meaning it operates in the cloud. All our code is configured there, and the tool runs integration testing, unit testing, user testing, and final production code tests. It's a day-to-day experience. It's utilized almost every day as part of our pipeline runs. Each team responsible for integration testing, human testing, user access testing, and preproduction testing runs it whenever they take a build.
Valavan Sivgalingam - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager, Security Engineering at ESS
Dynamic testing regularly identifies web vulnerabilities and has strong false positive confirmations
It has good false positive confirmations, confirmed issues identification, and proof of exploit-related features as part of it. We use Invicti for these things in our portfolios. The solution includes Proof-Based Scanning technology. Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios. For both the API endpoints and web applications, we do regular testing on a monthly basis for all our releases. Invicti does a good job. The only concern is on the performance side, but other than that, we find it really helpful in identifying web vulnerabilities. A full scan takes more time based on your website and other factors, but for us, it takes more than two to three days. The scan performance can be improved upon. When we check with them, they discuss proof-based scanning and related aspects. However, there could be intermittent results that could help us.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."
"The product saves us cost and time."
"Fortify Application Defender has a few drawbacks, it has its own pros and cons, but it's a good tool to use in any industry."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."
"It is one of those things that once you see it in action, it is pretty impressive."
"I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy."
"This is a great tool and the kind of support it provides is very helpful."
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"It has very good integration with the CI/CD pipeline."
"The platform is stable."
"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."
"We use simultaneous products, but I found this to be the best of the lot."
"Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment."
"The scanner and the result generator are valuable features for us."
"Netsparker offers some pretty features: Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms, this feature expands the attack surface, Attacking feature: Actually, attacking is not a solo feature, it contains many attack engines, Hawk, and many properties, but Netsparker's attacking mechanism is very flexible, this increases the vulnerability detection rate, also, Netsparker made the Hawk for real-time interactive command-line-based exploit testing, it's very valuable for a vulnerability scanner, and a very useful API for automating the scans."
"Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms. This feature expands the attack surface."
 

Cons

"The licensing can be a little complex."
"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."
"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"The false positive rate should be lower."
"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."
"Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing."
"It is a good tool, as we found out with the Community Edition trial, but the price point is quite expensive for a startup or average-sized company."
"The solution needs to make a more specific report."
"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."
"Improvement could be made in the area of production."
"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."
"The licensing model should be improved to be more cost-effective. There are URL restrictions that consume our license. Compared to other DAST solutions and task tools like WebInspect and Burp Enterprise, Invicti is very expensive. The solution’s scanning time is also very long compared to other DAST tools. It might be due to proof-based scanning."
"I find that the scannings are not sufficiently updated."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is very complex, it's project based and can range from $10,000 to $200,000+ depending on the project type and size."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive."
"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten. It comes as an annual cloud subscription. The tool's pricing is around 50 lakhs."
"The base licensing costs for the SaaS platform is about $900 USD per application, per year."
"Fortify Application Defender is very expensive."
"The product’s price is much higher than other tools."
"We are using an NFR license and I do not know the exact price of the NFR license. I think 20 FQDN for three years would cost around 35,000 US Dollars."
"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."
"Invicti is best suited for large enterprises. I don't think small and medium-sized businesses can afford it. Maintenance costs aren't that great."
"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."
"It is competitive in the security market."
"The price should be 20% lower"
"Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license."
"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
906,418 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?
The setup cost is pretty competitive. For example, if you want to talk about the SAST license, it comes to about $150 or sometimes less than $100, depending on the conversion or the number of licen...
What needs improvement with Invicti?
At this time, there is nothing that comes to mind. However, most of the products in the market are pretty much neck-to-neck competitors. Speaking about it, there are a couple of factors which they ...
What is your primary use case for Invicti?
I have worked on a couple of products, specifically in web application security. I have worked on Invicti, and with respect to PAM, I have worked with BeyondTrust. I have not worked specifically fo...
 

Also Known As

HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender
Netsparker
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ServiceMaster, Saltworks, SAP
Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: July 2026.
906,418 professionals have used our research since 2012.