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 #25. 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

3,137 Views
2,165 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Kiuwan

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

1,808 Views
1,464 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: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Invicti vs. Kiuwan

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,282 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 (9th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (5th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (5th)

Kiuwan

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

25th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (29th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 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) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
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

Anshul Anshul

Sr. Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

Efficient and accurate scanning, and detailed analysis

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. Another issue I've encountered is that Kiuwan only looks at the version of components and doesn't take into account any workaround fixes that have been implemented at the code level. This can result in false positives being reported. Additionally, these issues are in the "insights" tab and not in the code base security aspect. Lastly, when muting findings that are false positives, there should be an option to see the only available at the code level rather than at the organization level because it can lead to missing vulnerabilities if they are muted at the org level. An additional feature that would be helpful is the ability to easily download reports from Kiuwan. Specifically, in the "insights" tab, we have been encountering an error when trying to download the PDF report. We are able to download the code-based security report, but not the insights report. This has been an ongoing issue for the past couple of months and would be beneficial if it could be resolved. My main recommendation would be to address the issues with downloading reports that we have been experiencing. Additionally, it would be helpful if Kiuwan could support a wider range of programming languages, as there are currently some that are not compatible with the tool. If the code of a particular application falls under the category which is not compatible with Kiuwan, then it will not be able to scan it.

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

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

"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."

"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."

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

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

"Its ability to crawl a web application is quite different than another similar scanner."

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

More Invicti pros

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

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

"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report."

"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."

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

"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."

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

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"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."

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

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

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

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

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

More Invicti cons

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

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

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

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

"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 additional languages supported."

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."

"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."

"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."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"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."

"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

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

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

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

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

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

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

"Check with your account manager."

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

881,282 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

17%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

12%

University

11%

Financial Services Firm

Consumer Goods Company

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 15% of the time

SonarQube vs Invicti

Compared 8% of the time

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

Rapid7 InsightAppSec vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

SonarQube vs Kiuwan

Compared 34% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan

Compared 10% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 8% of the time

Snyk vs Kiuwan

Compared 7% of the time

Fortify Application Defender vs Kiuwan

Compared 3% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Invicti

January 2026

Download Invicti product report

Buyer's Guide

Kiuwan

January 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

December 2025

Free Report: Invicti vs. Kiuwan

Find out what your peers are saying about Invicti vs. Kiuwan and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,282 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.