Invicti vs Kiuwan comparison

Invicti and Kiuwan are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.5, while Kiuwan is ranked #26. Invicti holds a 1.5% 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

3,717 Views
2,379 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Kiuwan

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

2,214 Views
1,683 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: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Invicti vs. Kiuwan

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,732 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)

11th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Container Security (25th), 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 (28th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Invicti is 1.5%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.1%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Invicti	1.5%
Kiuwan	1.1%
Other	97.4%

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

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

"I would rate the stability as ten out of ten."

"Invicti's best feature is the ability to identify vulnerabilities and manually verify them."

"It correctly parses DOM and JS and has really good support for URL Rewrite rules, which is important for today's websites."

"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."

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

"This tool is really fast and the information that they provide on vulnerabilities is pretty good."

"The scanner and the result generator are valuable features for us."

More Invicti pros

"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."

"The solution offers very good technical support."

"I find it immensely helpful because it's not just about generating code; it's about ensuring efficiency in the execution."

"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."

"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 found the reporting features the most helpful."

"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."

"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

"Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing."

"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times. This needs to be looked into."

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

"Right now, they are missing the static application security part, especially web application security."

"The solution needs to make a more specific report."

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

"Invicti's reporting capabilities need enhancement."

"It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities."

More Invicti cons

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

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

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

"I would like to see additional languages supported."

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

"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."

"Integration of the programming tools could be improved."

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"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."

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."

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

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

"Check with your account manager."

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

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

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

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

884,732 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

University

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Performing Arts

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

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 10% of the time

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

Rapid7 InsightAppSec vs Invicti

Compared 4% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

SonarQube vs Kiuwan

Compared 25% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 9% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan

Compared 9% of the time

GitHub vs Kiuwan

Compared 7% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Kiuwan

Compared 3% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Invicti

March 2026

Download Invicti product report

Buyer's Guide

Kiuwan

March 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

March 2026

Free Report: Invicti vs. Kiuwan

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,732 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.