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

Invicti vs Kiuwan comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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)
16th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (32nd), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (14th), API Security (12th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (6th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (12th)
Kiuwan
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
29th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (34th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Invicti is 2.0%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.0%, down 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 (%)
Invicti2.0%
Kiuwan1.0%
Other97.0%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

PrashantUppuluri - PeerSpot reviewer
Solution Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Automated scanning has strengthened web application security and supports hybrid protection
A good scanning engine is what I appreciate about Invicti. When you want to find out the vulnerabilities within your web applications, Invicti has done a thorough job with respect to filtering out the vulnerabilities and identifying the risk factors with respect to the security modules within the solution. Invicti does have a segment of the solution which works on the automated scanning engine. As long as the license is active, the scanners that work within the solution are pretty effective. With respect to SAST and DAST, being a real-time scanning engine is one of the portfolios and one of the selling factors of the solution. Invicti is known to be a solution that works within the hybrid environment, be it cloud, on-premises, or a mix and match across multiple marketplaces. It does a thorough job. Most importantly, Invicti is a very good SAST and DAST solution that is very competitive in the market with respect to competitors. Invicti is a part of the Magic Quadrant with respect to Gartner's Magic Quadrant and has made a very good customer database and pipeline within the marketplace locally. With respect to security impacts in terms of support, Invicti is pretty much supportive. With respect to use cases or the POCs I have run on the solution, we have identified a couple of vulnerabilities and Invicti was able to trace them, detect, and quarantine the attacks.
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

"The scanner and the result generator are valuable features for us."
"It is a very good tool."
"It has very good integration with the CI/CD pipeline."
"Netsparker provides a more interactive interface that is more appealing."
"When we try to manually exploit the vulnerabilities, it often takes time to realize what's going on and what needs to be done."
"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."
"Scan, proxify the application, and then detailed report along with evidence and remediations to problems."
"The platform is stable."
"In our digital marketing efforts, our app is in continuous integration and having introduced this tool ensures we are always delivering safe code."
"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 advise using Kiuwan because it's very straightforward and totally easy to understand."
"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."
"​We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."
"The solution will measure your development team, give a KPI for the CISO, reduce the time it takes to find and correct coding errors, and more."
"We have had an improvement of 20% in our time to market and it significantly improved the quality of our code."
"Saving time and money by automatically identifying problems is unbelievable."
 

Cons

"Reporting should be improved. The reporting options should be made better for end-users."
"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."
"Reporting should be improved. The reporting options should be made better for end-users. Currently, it is possible, but it's not the best. Being able to choose what I want to see in my reports rather than being given prefixed information would make my life easier. I had to depend on the API for getting the content that I wanted. If they could fix the reporting feature to make it more comprehensive and user-friendly, it would help a lot of end-users. Everything else was good about this product."
"The scan performance can be improved upon."
"Currently, there is nothing I would like to improve."
"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times. This needs to be looked into."
"Maybe the ability to make a good reporting format is needed."
"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."
"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."
"The development-to-delivery phase."
"We faced a lot of problems with the initial setup and support gave us difficulties around the installation."
"I would like to see additional languages supported."
"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."
"The configuration hasn't been that good."
"More languages and frameworks would enhance this tool."
"The rate of false positives, where it reports issues that are not really issues, can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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"
"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."
"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."
"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."
"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."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."
"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."
"This solution is cheaper than other tools."
"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."
"Check with your account manager."
"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
917,884 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
Computer Software Company
6%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
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: September 2026.
917,884 professionals have used our research since 2012.