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 886,468 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

"I would definitely recommend to those who really want to know in-depth details of their applications/products regarding the security of their web system."

"I am impressed by the whole technology that they are using in this solution. It is really fast. When using netscan, the confirmation that it gives on the vulnerabilities is pretty cool. It is really easy to configure a scan in Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner. It is also really easy to deploy."

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

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

"It has improved the security of our code by scanning it and finding security defects."

"I'd recommend Netsparker for anyone who wants to make a security assessment for web applications."

"Netsparker has done an awesome job with its crawler, as it has found all of the links (also thanks to its good DOM parser)."

"When we try to manually exploit the vulnerabilities, it often takes time to realize what's going on and what needs to be done."

More Invicti pros

"The solution has a continuous integration process."

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

"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."

"We are using this solution to increase the quality of our software and to test the vulnerabilities in our tools before the customers find them."

"The technical support is very good, and we have received valid answers to our questions."

"Kiuwan has enabled us to give our customers peace of mind through early identification of code vulnerabilities and remediation before delivery to the customer."

"From the tool itself, the developer can run an analysis with the same quality, and with this tool, every developer has the opportunity to do an unlimited analysis."

"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker."

"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."

"Maybe supported clients can be improved. It still does not search vulnerabilities in DB2 databases, for example."

"The solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved."

"Maybe the ability to make a good reporting format is needed."

"The support's response time could be faster since we are in different time zones."

"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times."

"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."

More Invicti cons

"Integration of the programming tools could be improved."

"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."

"Perhaps more languages supported."

"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."

"I would like to see better integration with the Visual Studio and Eclipse IDEs."

"The QA developer and security could be improved."

"Perhaps more languages supported."

"The configuration hasn't been that good."

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is competitive in the security market."

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

"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."

"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 price should be 20% lower"

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

"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."

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

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

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

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

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

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

"Check with your account manager."

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

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

886,468 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

University

10%

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 9% 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

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan

Compared 8% of the time

GitHub 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

886,468 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.