Acunetix vs OWASP Zap comparison

Invicti and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #13 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 4.6% 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

4,155 Views
1,096 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

8,776 Views
507 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Acunetix

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 20, 2025

Acunetix and OWASP ZAP compete in the web application security testing category. Acunetix appears to have an edge due to its advanced features and user-friendly interface.

Features: Acunetix offers advanced features such as the Interactive Application Security Testing (IAST) module, robust scan scheduling capabilities, and detailed reporting. It provides ease of parameterizing attacks and generating PCI DSS compliance reports. OWASP ZAP provides open-source accessibility, making it cost-effective for users. It offers automated scanning, spidering, and comprehensive testing for vulnerabilities. Its strong community-driven development ensures continuous updates and enhancements.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix could improve its pricing model and manage license complexity, while enhancing interactive security testing and reducing false positives. OWASP ZAP needs better documentation, integration with more threat intelligence sources, and enhancements in reporting and vulnerability coverage. Users of both tools seek lower false positives.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix and OWASP ZAP can be deployed on-premises, with Acunetix also available as a hybrid cloud option. Acunetix provides 24/7 support, although some users experience delayed responses. OWASP ZAP relies largely on community support due to its open-source nature, with official support often being ticket-based.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix follows a high pricing model, with recent increases causing user concern despite a good ROI in security improvement. OWASP ZAP is free, eliminating financial barriers and making it popular among cost-sensitive users although its direct financial ROI is less evident.

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

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,168 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)

13th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (16th), Vulnerability Management (22nd), 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 July 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 4.6%, down from 4.8% 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

"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."

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

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the speed at which it can scan multiple domains in just a few hours."

"The scalability is good. 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."

"I find it to be one of the most comprehensive tools, with support for manual intervention."

"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."

"The most valuable feature of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."

"The tool's most valuable feature is performance."

More Acunetix pros

"The most valuable feature is scanning the URL to drill down all the different sites."

"The interface is easy to use."

"OWASP is quite matured in identifying the vulnerabilities."

"Simple and easy to learn and master."

"The scalability of this product is very good."

"The API is exceptional."

"One valuable feature of OWASP Zap is that it is simple to use."

"It has evolved over the years and recently in the last year they have added, HUD (Heads Up Display)."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"It should be easier to recreate something manually, with the manual tool, because Acunetix is an automatic tool. If it finds something, it should be easier to manually replicate it. Sometimes you don't get the raw data from the input and output, so that could be improved."

"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."

"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."

"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."

"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."

"Integration into other tools is very limited for Acunetix. While we're trying to incorporate a CI/CD process where we're integrating with JIRA and we're integrating with Jenkins and Chef, it becomes problematic. Other tools give you a high integration capability to connect into different solutions that you may already have, like JIRA."

"Acunetix needs to improve its cost."

"You can't actually change your password after you've set it unless you go back into the administration account and you change it there. Thus, if you're locked out and don't remember your password, that's a thing."

More Acunetix cons

"If there was an easier to understand exactly what has been checked and what has not been checked, it would make this solution better. We have to trust that it has checked all known vulnerabilities but it's a bit hard to see after the scanning."

"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."

"ZAP's integration with cloud-based CICD pipelines could be better. The scan should run through the entire pipeline."

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

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

"The ability to search the internet for other use cases and to use the solution to make applications more secure should be addressed."

"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."

"OWASP Zap could benefit from a noise cancellation feature like that of Burp Suite Professional, where AI helps reduce certain non-critical findings."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."

"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."

"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."

"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."

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

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

"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."

"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."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"The tool is open source."

"OWASP Zap is free to use."

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

"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."

"The solution’s pricing is high."

"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."

"The tool is open-source."

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

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

860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Government

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 7% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix

Compared 6% of the time

Tenable.io Web Application Scanning vs Acunetix

Compared 6% 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 9% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap

Compared 6% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

June 2025

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

June 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

June 2025

Free Report: Acunetix vs. OWASP Zap

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,168 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.