Invicti vs Kiuwan comparison

Invicti and Kiuwan are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #10 with an average rating of 8.5, while Kiuwan is ranked #26. Invicti holds a 1.7% mindshare in SAST, compared to Kiuwan’s 1.1% mindshare. Additionally, 96% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of Kiuwan users who would recommend it.

Invicti

Read 31 Invicti reviews

4,405 Views
2,687 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Kiuwan

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

2,646 Views
1,932 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Invicti

Kiuwan

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Invicti and Kiuwan are key players in the application security testing market. Invicti has the upper hand in ease of deployment and transparency in pricing, while Kiuwan is preferred for in-depth analysis and comprehensive coverage.

Features: Invicti offers efficient scanning capabilities, integration options, and ease of deployment. Kiuwan is known for extensive code analysis, support for multiple languages, and comprehensive coverage.

Room for Improvement: Invicti could enhance false positive management, expand language support, and improve speed. Kiuwan needs to improve speed, optimize resource usage, and address customer service.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Invicti is praised for straightforward deployment and responsive support. Kiuwan offers flexible deployment models but needs improvements in service responsiveness.

Pricing and ROI: Invicti provides a transparent pricing structure with satisfactory ROI. Kiuwan has higher pricing, justified by its advanced features that users value, making the investment worthwhile.

To learn more, read our detailed Invicti vs. Kiuwan Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Invicti vs. Kiuwan

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 890,071 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

Invicti

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

10th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Container Security (24th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (8th), API Security (8th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (5th)

Kiuwan

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

26th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (30th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Invicti is 1.7%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Invicti	1.7%
Kiuwan	1.1%
Other	97.2%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Valavan Sivgalingam

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.

Read full review

Mustufa Bhavnagarwala

CyberRisk Solution Advisor at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees

Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement

Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran the tool and tried to scan the repository to find the security issues. The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required.

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

"The most valuable features that I've found in this solution was the level of accuracy and also that the process of scanning was very quick and we're easily able to change the frame of a scan."

"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."

"Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms. This feature expands the attack surface."

"The dashboard is really cool, and the features are really good. It tells you about the software version you're using in your web application. It gives you the entire technology stack, and that really helps. Both web and desktop apps are good in terms of application scanning. It has a lot of security checks that are easily customizable as per your requirements. It also has good customer support."

"I am impressed by the whole technology that they are using in this solution, as it is really fast and, when using netscan, the confirmation that it gives on the vulnerabilities is pretty cool."

"Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios."

"It has a comprehensive resulting mechanism. It is a one-stop solution for all your security testing mechanisms."

"NetSparker is a very easy to use and understand product."

More Invicti pros

"In our digital marketing efforts, our app is in continuous integration and having introduced this tool ensures we are always delivering safe code."

"The most valuable feature is the time to resolution, where it tells you how long it is going to take to get to a zero-base or a five-star security rating."

"We switched because Kiuwan covers the entire SDLC; provides direct information to act upon, for the developer, architects, QA, CIO and CISO, in a few seconds; automatically, fully integrated in any CI/CD setup."

"We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."

"Lifecycle features, because they permit us to show non-technical people the risk and costs hidden into the code due to bad programming practices."

"I've tried many open source applications and the remediation or correction actions that were provided by Kiuwan were very good in comparison."

"The solution offers very good technical support."

"The feature that I have found the most valuable in Kiuwan is the speed of scanning. Compared to other SaaS tools I have used, Kiuwan is much quicker in performing scans. I have not yet used it on a large code base, but from what I have experienced, it is efficient and accurate. Additionally, I have used it both manually and in an automated pipeline, and both methods have been effective. The speed of scanning is what makes it valuable to me."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"They don't really provide the proof of concept up to the level that we need in our organization."

"They don't really provide the proof of concept up to the level that we need in our organization. We are a consultancy firm, and we provide consultancy for the implementation and deployment solutions to our customers. When you run the scans and the scan is completed, it only shows the proof of exploit, which really doesn't work because the tool is running the scan and exploiting on the read-only form. You don't really know whether it is actually giving the proof of exploit. We cannot prove it manually to a customer that the exploit is genuine. It is really hard to perform it manually and prove it to the concerned development, remediation, and security teams. It is currently missing the static application security part of the application security, especially web application security. It would be really cool if they can integrate a SAS tool with their dynamic one."

"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."

"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."

"Asset scanning could be better. Once, it couldn't scan assets, and the issue was strange. The price doesn't fit the budget of small and medium-sized businesses."

"The proxy review, the use report views, the current use tool and the subset requests need some improvement. It was hard to understand how to use them."

"They could enhance the support for data swap testing for the platform."

"Currently, there is nothing I would like to improve."

More Invicti cons

"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."

"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."

"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."

"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."

"The development-to-delivery phase."

"I would like to see additional languages supported."

"The rate of false positives, where it reports issues that are not really issues, can be improved."

"Integration of the programming tools could be improved."

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."

"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."

"It is competitive in the security market."

"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."

"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."

"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."

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."

"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."

"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."

"Check with your account manager."

"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."

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

890,071 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

University

11%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	13

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	16
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	6

Questions from the Community

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...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 9% of the time

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 8% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

SonarQube vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

Snyk vs Invicti

Compared 4% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

SonarQube vs Kiuwan

Compared 21% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 11% of the time

GitHub vs Kiuwan

Compared 7% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan

Compared 7% of the time

Snyk vs Kiuwan

Compared 5% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Invicti

April 2026

Download Invicti product report

Buyer's Guide

Kiuwan

April 2026

Download Kiuwan product report

Also Known As

Netsparker

No data available

Overview

Invicti helps DevSecOps teams automate security tasks and save hundreds of hours each month by identifying web vulnerabilities that matter. Combining dynamic with interactive testing (DAST + IAST) and software composition analysis (SCA), Invicti scans every corner of an app to find what other tools miss with 99.98% accuracy, delivering on the promise of Zero Noise AppSec. Invicti helps discover all web assets — even ones that are lost, forgotten, or created by rogue departments. With an array of out-of-the-box integrations, DevSecOps teams can get ahead of their workloads to hit critical deadlines, improve processes, and communicate more effectively while reducing risk and hitting the ROI goals.

Invicti

Software analytics technology with a breadth of third party integrations that takes into account the wealth of applications your teams are currently using.

We facilitate and encourage work between unlocalized teams. We understand the complexity of working on multi technology environments, constantly striving to increase the number of programming languages and technologies we support.

Kiuwan

Sample Customers

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank

DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial

Buyer's Guide

Invicti vs. Kiuwan

April 2026

Free Report: Invicti vs. Kiuwan

Find out what your peers are saying about Invicti vs. Kiuwan and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

890,071 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Invicti vs. Kiuwan report.

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.