Invicti vs Kiuwan comparison

Invicti and Kiuwan are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.4, while Kiuwan is ranked #28. Invicti holds a 1.8% mindshare in SAST, compared to Kiuwan’s 1.0% 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

6,114 Views
3,546 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Kiuwan

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

3,387 Views
2,371 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: June 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Invicti vs. Kiuwan

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 904,680 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)

12th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Container Security (26th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (10th), API Security (10th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (8th)

Kiuwan

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

28th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (32nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Invicti is 1.8%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.0%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Invicti	1.8%
Kiuwan	1.0%
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

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

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

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

"Netsparker offers some pretty features: Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms, this feature expands the attack surface, Attacking feature: Actually, attacking is not a solo feature, it contains many attack engines, Hawk, and many properties, but Netsparker's attacking mechanism is very flexible, this increases the vulnerability detection rate, also, Netsparker made the Hawk for real-time interactive command-line-based exploit testing, it's very valuable for a vulnerability scanner, and a very useful API for automating the scans."

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

"It is a very good tool."

"Netsparker provides a more interactive interface that is more appealing."

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

More Invicti pros

"I advise using Kiuwan because it's very straightforward and totally easy to understand."

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

"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."

"The solution offers very good technical support."

"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."

"I've found the reporting features the most helpful."

"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."

"With Kiuwan, we were able to help our clients get a better visibility of their development activities and to mitigate risks."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"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."

"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."

"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."

"Sometimes, it is slow; when we are running this application and browsing other applications concurrently, it makes other applications work slow."

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

"I find that the scannings are not sufficiently updated."

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

"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."

More Invicti cons

"For mobile development, we are not too experienced, and it is not the perfect tool because the integration with certain products is very manual."

"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."

"The rate of false positives, where it reports issues that are not really issues, can be improved."

"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."

"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."

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

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

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"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."

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."

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

"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."

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

"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."

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

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

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

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

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

904,680 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

Construction Company

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

12%

University

11%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software 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

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 8% of the time

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

SonarQube vs Invicti

Compared 4% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Invicti

Compared 4% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

SonarQube vs Kiuwan

Compared 19% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 13% of the time

GitHub vs Kiuwan

Compared 7% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan

Compared 6% of the time

Snyk vs Kiuwan

Compared 4% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Invicti

July 2026

Download Invicti product report

Buyer's Guide

Kiuwan

July 2026

Download Kiuwan product report

Also Known As

Netsparker

No data available

Overview

Invicti offers advanced web application security testing focused on identifying vulnerabilities like SQL injection and cross-site scripting. Its Proof-Based Scanning minimizes false positives and integrates seamlessly with CI/CD pipelines, making it an effective tool for enterprise environments.

Invicti provides comprehensive scanning capabilities that include detecting and verifying critical vulnerabilities and security data consolidation. Its scalable scanning engine and robust API support allow for flexible testing across diverse environments, including web and API testing. Despite some drawbacks like limited single sign-on integration and slow scanning speeds for large applications, Invicti remains a popular choice for automating security assessments, ensuring compliance with standards like OWASP Top 10, PCI DSS, and GDPR.

What are the key features of Invicti?

Comprehensive Vulnerability Scanning: Detects vulnerabilities like SQL injection and XSS.
Proof-Based Scanning: Confirms exploitability and reduces false positives.
CI/CD Integration: Seamlessly integrates with development pipelines.
Security Data Consolidation: Centralizes data for better insights.
User-Friendly Interface: Facilitates easy analysis and reporting.
Scalable Scanning Engine: Supports testing in enterprise environments.
Robust API Support: Enhances flexibility in testing.

What benefits and ROI should users look for in reviews?

Proactive Security: Actively identifies and verifies vulnerabilities to prevent breaches.
Regulatory Compliance: Helps maintain compliance with standards like PCI DSS and GDPR.
Efficient Vulnerability Management: Aids in prioritizing remediation efforts.
Integration Capabilities: Streamlines processes with CI/CD pipeline compatibility.

In industries like finance, healthcare, and e-commerce, Invicti is implemented to bolster security through automated vulnerability assessments. Its ability to provide insightful reports and remediation suggestions assists companies in efficiently managing security risks and achieving compliance with critical regulatory standards.

Invicti

Kiuwan offers comprehensive security and vulnerability testing capabilities, focusing on code analysis, fast scanning, and detailed risk assessments. Supporting many technologies, it integrates well into development workflows to ensure code compliance and enhance code quality.

Known for its application portfolio governance, Kiuwan provides fast scanning and reporting features, alongside an intuitive interface. It supports languages from COBOL to JavaScript, offering modular capabilities and security integration for continuous deployment. Developers can perform efficient local or cloud-based scans, benefiting from action plans for better code correction. Integration with tools like Jenkins facilitates quick processing and detailed risk assessments, while challenges remain in language support expansion and smoother integration with Azure DevOps and popular IDEs. Enhanced frameworks and mobile development testing would amplify its utility, with users seeking improved navigation, report downloading, and technical support.

What are the most important features of Kiuwan?

Fast Scanning: Provides quick scans for immediate insights.
Reporting: Robust features for generating detailed reports.
Intuitive UI: Easy-to-navigate interface.
Technology Coverage: Supports a range of languages from COBOL to JS.
Tool Integration: Seamlessly integrates with Jenkins for CI/CD processes.
Modularity: Allows specific models for targeted analysis.

What benefits or ROI should users look for in Kiuwan reviews?

Enhanced Code Security: Identifies vulnerabilities swiftly and efficiently.
Continuous Integration: Facilitates ongoing security assessments.
Improved Code Compliance: Helps maintain adherence to coding standards.
Actionable Insights: Provides risk assessments with actionable recommendations.

In industries focused on software development, Kiuwan is integral for security and vulnerability assessments. It's embedded into workflows to analyze, detect and correct vulnerabilities, addressing threats like SQL injection and adhering to OWASP Top 10. The tool supports secure coding practices and performance evaluation, aiding organizations in maintaining rigorous security standards.

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

June 2026

Free Report: Invicti vs. Kiuwan

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

904,680 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.