Acunetix vs OWASP Zap comparison

Invicti and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.3, while OWASP is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0. Invicti holds a 3.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 4.7% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OWASP users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 33 Acunetix reviews

6,151 Views
3,998 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

8,982 Views
8,174 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Acunetix

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 27, 2025

Acunetix and OWASP Zap compete in the web application security testing category. Acunetix appears to have the upper hand due to its advanced reporting and scanning features.

Features: Acunetix offers a web-based interface, the Interactive Application Security Testing (IAS) module, and comprehensive scheduling and reporting features. OWASP Zap, being open-source and free, supports automation and integration capabilities but lacks in-depth reporting.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix could enhance its IAS module, simplify manual replication of findings, and improve user interface intuitiveness. OWASP Zap would benefit from better documentation and reporting features, reduced false positives, and improved scanning speed and coverage.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix supports versatile deployment methods, both on-premises and hybrid cloud. Customer support is mixed with occasional delays. OWASP Zap mainly supports on-premises deployment with community support and a ticketing system for customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix is a premium tool with increased pricing over time, but users report positive ROI due to its comprehensive features. OWASP Zap offers great value as a free, open-source tool suitable for smaller businesses but requires more manual effort for equivalent security assurance.

To learn more, read our detailed Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,164 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

Acunetix

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

12th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (16th), Vulnerability Management (21st), DevSecOps (6th)

OWASP Zap

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

11th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 3.5%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 4.7%, up from 4.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil

CEO at Xcelliti

Has enabled teams to improve security testing with smooth integration and high accuracy

Acunetix has a very good ratio of fewer false positives, so users don't need to retest everything. Acunetix operates smoothly with no interruptions required, and it performs at 100% efficiency without issues in scanning anything. The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities. Acunetix integrates with every type of tool, including CI/CD tools, offering 100% integration in DevOps environments. The main benefit of Acunetix is that at the first level, users can address security issues related to penetration testing, allowing them to expose vulnerabilities and ensure all required testing is completed with very few false positives.

Read full review

Amit Beniwal

Project Manager at Al Hassan LLC

Simplifies vulnerability discovery and has high quality support

There are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores. Sometimes, a vulnerability initially categorized as high severity may be reduced to medium or low over time after security patches are applied. This alignment with the present severity score and CVSS score could be improved.

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

"We are able to create a report which shows the PCI DSS scoring and share it with the application teams. Then, they can correlate and see exactly what they need to fix, and why."

"It can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."

"It's very user-friendly for the testing teams. It's very easy for them to understand things and to fix vulnerabilities."

"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."

"It generates automated reports."

"I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."

"The solution is highly stable."

"Picks up weaknesses in our app setups."

More Acunetix pros

"The OWASP's tool is free of cost, which gives it a great advantage, especially for smaller companies to make use of the tool."

"OWASP is quite matured in identifying the vulnerabilities."

"I consider OWASP Zap to be the most effective solution overall; being open source allows integration with other systems via OWASP Zap APIs."

"The HUD is a good feature that provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."

"The scalability of this product is very good."

"We use the solution for security testing."

"Fuzzer and Java APIs help a lot with our custom needs."

"OWASP is quite matured in identifying the vulnerabilities."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"It is difficult to create a proxy connection."

"The only problem that they have is the price. It is a bit expensive, and you cannot change the number of applications for the whole year."

"I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection."

"The cost can be reduced as management has noted it to be on the higher side."

"The solution is generally stable, however, there might be room for improvement regarding glitches or bugs."

"We have had issues during upgrades where their scans worked on some apps better with previous versions. Then, we had to work with their tech support, who were great, to get it fixed for the next version."

"There is room for improvement in the pricing."

"Acunetix needs to be dynamic with JavaScript code, unlike Netsparker which can scan complex agents."

More Acunetix cons

"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."

"Zap could improve by providing better reports for security and recommendations for the vulnerabilities."

"OWASP Zap needs to extend to mobile application testing."

"The solution is somewhat unreliable because after we get the finding, we have to manually verify each of its findings to see whether it's a false positive or a true finding, and it takes time."

"The work that it does in the limited scope is good, but the scope is very limited in terms of the scanning features. The number of things it tests or finds is limited. They need to make it a more of a mainstream tool that people can use, and they can even think about having it on a proprietary basis. They need to increase the coverage of the scan and the results that it finds. That has always been Zap's limitation. Zap is a very good tool for a beginner, but once you start moving up the ladder where you want further details and you want your scan to show more in-depth results, Zap falls short because its coverage falls short. It does not have the capacity to do more."

"They stopped their support for a short period. They've recently started to come back again. In the early days, support was much better."

"I would like to see a version of “repeater” within OWASP ZAP, a tool capable of sending from one to 1000 of the same requests, but with preselected modified fields, changing from a predetermined word list, or manually created."

"The product reporting could be improved."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When compared with other products, the pricing is a little bit high. But it gives value for the price. It serves the purpose and is worthwhile for the price we pay."

"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."

"It is a bit expensive. If you need to check five applications, you have to pay almost 14,000. It is an agreement for two years at 7,000 per year for only five applications. You cannot change the applications in the license. So, you are stuck with the same license for the five applications for one full year."

"The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable."

"When we looked at all other vendors and what they were asking for, to provide a third of what Acunetix was capable of doing, it was an easy decision... But now that it's coming to a cost where it's line with market value, it becomes more of a competition... Acunetix is raising the cost of licensing. It's 3.5 times what we were initially quoted."

"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."

"Implementing Acunetix needs a medium or larger business agency, because you need some money to get Acunetix. It is costly, but if you care about your agency's security, then maybe it's a cost that might help you in the future."

"The price is exceptionally high."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"It is open source, and we can scan freely."

"It's free and open, currently under the Apache 2 license. If ZAP does what you need it to do, selling a free solution is a very easy."

"This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."

"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."

"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."

"OWASP Zap is free to use."

"The tool is open-source."

"OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate."

More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice

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

865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

Most of the customers who use Acunetix are looking for security testing. The primary use case is performing penetration testing. The main use cases include vulnerability scanning, security testing,...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

Acunetix supports multi-user environments effectively. Acunetix is targeted for small to mid-size teams in a DevSecOps environment, making it the best choice for small and mid-size companies, offer...

See all answers

Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?

OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...

See all answers

What do you like most about OWASP Zap?

The best feature is the Zap HUD (Heads Up Display) because the customers can use the website normally. If we scan websites with automatic scanning, and the website has a web application firewall, i...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OWASP Zap?

OWASP might be cost-effective, however, people prefer to use the free edition available as open source.

See all answers

Comparisons

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 11% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 9% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 8% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

Tenable.io Web Application Scanning vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OWASP Zap

Compared 19% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap

Compared 11% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap

Compared 5% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

August 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

August 2025

Download OWASP Zap product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

No data available

Overview

Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner is an automated web application security testing tool that audits your web applications by checking for vulnerabilities like SQL Injection, Cross site scripting, and other exploitable vulnerabilities.

Invicti

OWASP Zap is a free and open-source web application security scanner.

The solution helps developers identify vulnerabilities in their web applications by actively scanning for common security issues.

With its user-friendly interface and powerful features, Zap is a popular choice among developers for ensuring the security of their web applications.

OWASP

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand

1. Google 2. Microsoft 3. IBM 4. Amazon 5. Facebook 6. Twitter 7. LinkedIn 8. Netflix 9. Adobe 10. PayPal 11. Salesforce 12. Cisco 13. Oracle 14. Intel 15. HP 16. Dell 17. VMware 18. Symantec 19. McAfee 20. Citrix 21. Red Hat 22. Juniper Networks 23. SAP 24. Accenture 25. Deloitte 26. Ernst & Young 27. PwC 28. KPMG 29. Capgemini 30. Infosys 31. Wipro 32. TCS

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap

July 2025

Free Report: Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap

Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap 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.