Acunetix vs OWASP Zap comparison

Invicti and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #8 with an average rating of 7.9, while OWASP is ranked #15 with an average rating of 8.0. Invicti holds a 2.6% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 3.1% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OWASP users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 36 Acunetix reviews

8,861 Views
5,051 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

8,361 Views
7,692 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Acunetix

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

Acunetix and OWASP Zap are contenders in web application security testing. Acunetix generally leads due to its extensive feature set, though OWASP Zap’s cost-effectiveness as a free tool makes it more accessible for smaller organizations.

Features: Acunetix offers scheduling of tests, an Interactive Application Security Testing module, and comprehensive reporting. It also integrates with other applications, providing flexibility and scalability. OWASP Zap provides automated scanning, API support, and a user-friendly interface beneficial for beginners and supports various platforms like Mac, Linux, and Windows.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix users mention the need for better report customization and have noted issues with false positives. More integration capabilities with newer tools like GitHub and flexible licensing options are also desired. For OWASP Zap, improvements in reporting with more graphical illustrations, enhanced tackling of false positives, and advanced features for mobile app testing are suggested. Users also seek more frequent updates and increased coverage complexity.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix supports versatile deployment options, including on-premises and hybrid cloud, and offers satisfactory technical support, although improvement in response times is noted. OWASP Zap, primarily deployed on-premises, benefits from community-driven support, providing timely assistance despite the lack of traditional 24-hour customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix is perceived as expensive, with rising costs impacting its value compared to alternatives but offers a return on investment through enhanced security. Conversely, OWASP Zap, being free and open-source, eliminates licensing costs, significantly boosting ROI, particularly for organizations with limited budgets.

To learn more, read our detailed Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 893,244 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)

8th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (15th), Vulnerability Management (30th), DevSecOps (5th)

OWASP Zap

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

15th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.6%, down from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 3.1%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Acunetix	2.6%
OWASP Zap	3.1%
Other	94.3%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Rahul Kumar

Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees

Identifies vulnerabilities across bulk web applications but needs better support and cleaner reports

The best feature Acunetix offers is the centralized dashboard and the quality of reports it generates, which includes various options for selecting reports and developer options for directly sharing the reports with developers. The centralized dashboard of Acunetix gives visibility into the security aspects of mass applications; for instance, with more than 200 applications, it provides a valuable overview of findings and necessary fixes, along with a high-level summary that helps us achieve compliance through monthly and sometimes weekly scanning. In terms of reporting, Acunetix is excellent because it can generate different types of reports, such as an executive summary report, detailed reports, and developer reports that can be shared directly with developers. Acunetix positively impacts my organization by helping identify outdated libraries and applications, including legacy applications vulnerable to old attacks based on OWASP Top 10, thus aiding in compliance checks for PCI DSS and OWASP. Acunetix provides a centralized report with compliance-related aspects and a vulnerability timeline, effectively helping reduce vulnerabilities and save time.

Read full review

Nithin-K

Technical Analyst at Hexaware Technologies Limited

Open source testing tool empowers manual activities and has room to improve integration and reporting features

The improvement that has to be done for APIs focuses on manual activities where the feature exists, but it is not at the same level as what Burp Suite does with intercepting and tools such as Postman, so it needs improvement. There are limitations with authentication levels, particularly with form-based and cookie-based authentication. However, overall, we are satisfied with OWASP Zap as there are no major issues, and improving the scan engine could be beneficial. When comparing OWASP Zap and Burp Suite, the main difference besides pricing is that OWASP Zap has limitations with reporting levels and UI, which affects its reporting capabilities, whereas Burp Suite is already advancing with new AI features and scanning capabilities that OWASP Zap seems to be lacking.

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

"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."

"The scalability is more than good because it can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated as part of applications, so that really makes it a very, very versatile solution to have."

"Every organization who has their assets over the internet and are exposed to a public website needs to have vulnerability assessment using Acunetix."

"The solution is paying for itself, as our applications are more secure."

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

"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."

"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."

"After two years it's about 300%."

More Acunetix pros

"The vulnerabilities that it finds, because the primary goal is to secure applications and websites."

"ZAP is easy to use. The automated scan is a powerful feature. You can simulate attacks with various parameters. ZAP integrates well with SonarQube."

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

"The interface is easy to use."

"It's great that we can use it with Portswigger Burp."

"This solution is providing us with value and as long as it continues to do so, we'll continue to use it."

"Simple and easy to learn and master."

"They offer free access to some other tools."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"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."

"I rate its stability six out of ten."

"There's a clear need for a reduction in pricing to make the service more accessible."

"Improving the handling of false positives would be beneficial because it can be challenging to trust the findings flagged by Acunetix, and those findings must be manually validated."

"It is difficult to create a proxy connection."

"There was an issue related to updates from the internet."

"We want to see how much bandwidth usage it consumes. When we monitor traffic we have issues with the consumption and throttling of the traffic."

"When monitoring the traffic we always have issues with the bandwidth consumption and the throttling of traffic."

More Acunetix cons

"The forced browse has been incorporated into the program and it is resource-intensive."

"Online documentation can be improved to utilize all features of ZAP and API methods to make use in automation."

"I prefer Burp Suite to OWASP Zap because of the extensive coverage it offers."

"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."

"There's very little documentation that comes with OWASP Zap."

"The documentation is lacking and out-of-date, it really needs more love."

"Online documentation can be improved to utilize all features of ZAP and API methods to make use in automation."

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

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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 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."

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

"The price is exceptionally high."

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

"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."

"The solution is expensive."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

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

"This solution is open source and free."

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

"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."

"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."

"The tool is open-source."

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

893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

11%

University

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	15
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	18

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	21

Questions from the Community

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

My main use of Acunetix is to scan my web application. I mostly deal with web applications and with Acunetix Network Security Component, but I have not activated the network component before and wi...

See all answers

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

I am still working with Acunetix, and we have even moved to their new platform, Invicti. I have requested a demo for Acunetix DeepScan technology, but I have yet to go through DeepScan. That was th...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Acunetix?

I would say the pricing is average, but still, it is higher than low.

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 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

What needs improvement with OWASP Zap?

See all answers

Comparisons

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 7% of the time

Invicti vs Acunetix

Compared 5% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 4% of the time

Veracode vs Acunetix

Compared 4% of the time

SonarQube vs Acunetix

Compared 4% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

SonarQube vs OWASP Zap

Compared 10% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap

Compared 7% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap

Compared 6% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

May 2026

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

April 2026

Download OWASP Zap product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

No data available

Overview

Acunetix is a dynamic application security tool used globally for web application vulnerability scanning, focusing on SQL injection and cross-site scripting.

Acunetix provides a comprehensive web vulnerability assessment platform designed for identifying and remediating security threats. Users benefit from its ability to schedule scans, boasting a fast detection rate for common vulnerabilities. The tool's centralized dashboard helps organizations with compliance monitoring and features such as crawling and login sequence enhancements, contributing depth to its security assessments. Despite high praise for its integration capabilities and automated scanning that saves time, pricing and false positives present challenges. Organizations often use Acunetix to maintain internal security and evaluate pre-release environments.

What are Acunetix's main features?

Comprehensive Reporting: Detailed reports assist in security analysis and compliance audits.
User-Friendly Interface: Simple navigation enhances user experience.
Scheduled Scans: Automation of scans allows for continuous monitoring.
Fast Detection: Quickly identifies vulnerabilities like SQL injection and cross-site scripting.
Integration Capabilities: Scalable solutions with compatibility across applications.
Crawling & Login Sequence: Improves depth in security analysis.

What benefits should businesses look for in reviews?

Low False Positive Rate: Accurate vulnerability detection saves time in analysis.
Time Efficiency: Automated scans reduce manual workload, improving team productivity.
Scalability: Integration features help accommodate growth and complexity.
Compliance Support: Centralized dashboard supports regulatory compliance checks.

In industries like finance, healthcare, and technology, Acunetix assists in protecting sensitive data through robust scanning and reporting capabilities. Its ability to perform dynamic assessments makes it a chosen tool in regulatory environments and development settings, offering both internal security inspections and pre-release evaluations.

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

April 2026

Free Report: Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap

Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

893,244 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.