Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Invicti vs SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 30, 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)
14th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
API Security (5th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd)
SonarQube Cloud (formerly S...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
10th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Invicti is 1.4%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) is 6.7%, down from 6.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Kunal M - PeerSpot reviewer
Proactive scanning measures and realistic audit recommendations enhance development focus
Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment. This feature helps us focus on priorities and prioritize the development team's effort, integrating seamlessly with DevOps to facilitate proactive scans of environments. Invicti also provides audit recommendations that are quite realistic, making it easy to discuss plans with developers.
Diego Moreo - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced code quality with data consolidation needs and good pipeline integration
We have SonarCloud integrated into our pipeline. It is used as a tool for checking code quality, clean code, bugs, and security issues. It acts as a quality gate for production, helping decide if our code can be applied SonarCloud aids us in checking major issues in legacy systems and helps…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Netsparker has valuable features, including the ability to scan our website, an interactive approach, and security data integration."
"Invicti's best feature is the ability to identify vulnerabilities and manually verify them."
"The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan."
"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."
"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."
"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."
"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 reports from SonarCloud are very good."
"The most valuable features of SonarCloud are the ability to discover vulnerabilities, security weak points, security hotspots, and all the feedback that comes into the feature branch. You can deploy the code with the security, you can eliminate the problem at the developer level rather than identifying the problem in the productions."
"Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service."
"I find SonarQube Cloud very easy to use and simple to integrate initially."
"I find SonarQube Cloud very easy to use and simple to integrate initially."
"Its dashboard provides a unified view of various code quality metrics, including code duplication, unit test coverage, and security hotspots."
"The most valuable feature of SonarCloud is its overall performance."
"The SaaS solution for checking code without execution and dealing with security issues is valuable."
 

Cons

"The solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved."
"The proxy review, the use report views, the current use tool and the subset requests need some improvement. It was hard to understand how to use them."
"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."
"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."
"Currently, there is nothing I would like to improve."
"The custom attack preparation screen might be improved."
"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 scannings are not sufficiently updated."
"The solution needs to improve its customization and flexibility."
"I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers."
"The documentation needs improvement on optimizing build time for seamless CI/CD integration with our Android apps."
"We had some issues with the scanner."
"SonarQube Cloud could improve its vulnerability detection compared to Veracode."
"Reporting features are missing in SonarCloud."
"The reports could improve by providing more information. We are not able to use the reports in our operation until they are improved. Additionally, if the vendor provided more customization capabilities it would be a benefit."
"SonarQube Cloud could improve its vulnerability detection compared to Veracode. Additionally, it has fewer capabilities, which prompted us to use Veracode."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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 current pricing is quite cheap."
"The price of SonarCloud could be less expensive. We are using the community version and the price should be more reasonable."
"Previously, the pricing was 17,000 euros for five million lines analyzed. However, they now charge $15,000 per one million lines, significantly increasing the cost."
"I am using the free version of the solution."
"The price of SonarCloud is not expensive, it goes by the lines of code. 1 million lines per code are approximately 4,000 USD per year. If you need 2 million lines of code you would double the annual cost."
"I rate the pricing a five out of ten."
"While not extremely cheap, it aligns well with market standards and offers good value."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
55%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?
As a technical user, I do not handle pricing or licensing, but I am aware that Invicti offers flexible licensing models based on organizational needs.
What do you like most about Invicti?
The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan.
What needs improvement with Invicti?
Currently, there is nothing I would like to improve.
What do you like most about SonarCloud?
Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SonarCloud?
Previously, the pricing was 17,000 euros for five million lines analyzed. However, they now charge $15,000 per one million lines, significantly increasing the cost.
What needs improvement with SonarCloud?
Reporting features are missing in SonarCloud. We do not have a way to consolidate data within the tool, requiring us to extract data and use Power BI for reports.
 

Also Known As

Netsparker
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Invicti vs. SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.