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

Invicti vs Kiuwan 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

Invicti
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
10th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
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
23
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
ProductMindshare (%)
Invicti1.7%
Kiuwan1.1%
Other97.2%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Mustufa Bhavnagarwala - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."
"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."
"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 solution generates reports automatically and quickly and it's a very user-friendly product."
"Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment."
"Its ability to crawl a web application is quite different than another similar scanner."
"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."
"NetSparker is a very easy to use and understand product."
"I advise using Kiuwan because it's very straightforward and totally easy to understand."
"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."
"This solution helps us to catch issues early on, and find problems that we never knew we had."
"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."
"The technical support is very good, and we have received valid answers to our questions."
"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."
"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."
"I find it immensely helpful because it's not just about generating code; it's about ensuring efficiency in the execution."
 

Cons

"Reporting should be improved. The reporting options should be made better for end-users."
"Perhaps the custom attack preparation screen might be improved."
"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."
"Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing."
"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."
"Invicti's reporting capabilities need enhancement. We need enterprise-level information instead of repo-level details. Unlike Appiro, Invicti does not provide portfolio-level insights into vulnerability remediation over time."
"Improvement could be made in the area of production."
"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."
"Perhaps more languages supported."
"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."
"We faced a lot of problems with the initial setup and support gave us difficulties around the installation."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"Kiuwan's support has room for improvement. You can only open a ticket is through email, and the support team is outside of our country. They should have a support number or chat."
"The development-to-delivery phase."
"In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further."
"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It is competitive in the security market."
"The price should be 20% lower"
"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"Check with your account manager."
"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."
"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."
"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
886,011 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Government
7%
University
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
 

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...
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Netsparker
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank
DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial
Find out what your peers are saying about Invicti vs. Kiuwan and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
886,011 professionals have used our research since 2012.