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

Acunetix vs Synopsys API Security Testing comparison

Invicti and Black Duck are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Invicti is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.3, while Black Duck is ranked #39. Invicti holds a 3.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to Black Duck’s 0.1% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Black Duck users who would recommend it.
Acunetix
Read 33 Acunetix reviews
  • 6,151 Views
  • 3,998 Comparison Views
86% willing to recommend
Synopsys API Security Testing
Read 1 Synopsys API Security Testing review
  • 348 Views
  • 219 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive Summary
We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Synopsys API Security Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST).

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: August 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
August 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
33
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (16th), Vulnerability Management (21st), DevSecOps (6th)
Synopsys API Security Testing
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
39th
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
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 Synopsys API Security Testing is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

KashifJamil - PeerSpot reviewer
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
UmarQureshi - PeerSpot reviewer
Useful threat vectors, beneficial results, but implementation needed support
We are using Synopsys API Security Testing for scanning APIs for risks and vulnerabilities and to understand our posture before deployment within our business The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares. I have been…
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 can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."
"One of the features that I feel is groundbreaking, that I would like to see expanded on, is the IAS feature: The Interactive Application Security Testing module that gets loaded onto an application on a server, for more in-depth, granular findings. I think that is really neat. I haven't seen a lot of competitors doing that."
"The automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the speed at which it can scan multiple domains in just a few hours."
"I find it to be one of the most comprehensive tools, with support for manual intervention."
"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."
"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."
"The features of Acunetix have proved most effective in identifying vulnerabilities."
More Acunetix pros
"The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares."
 

Cons

"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."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us."
"The solution can be improved by adding the ability to scan subdomains automatically, and by providing reports that can be exported to external databases to share with other solutions."
"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."
"It would be nice to have a feature to "retest" only a single vulnerability that the customer reports as patched, and delete it from the next scans since it has already been patched."
"Currently only supports web scanning."
"It is difficult to create a proxy connection."
"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."
More Acunetix cons
"The solution required us to use our team and we spoke to Synopsys API Security Testing's support to do the implementation. We use two people from our team for the implementation. and one person for maintenance."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."
"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."
"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 price is exceptionally high."
"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."
More Acunetix pricing and cost advice
Information not available
report
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
9%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
13%
Insurance Company
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix Logo
OWASP Zap vs Acunetix
Compared 17% of the time
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix Logo
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix
Compared 11% of the time
HCL AppScan vs Acunetix Logo
HCL AppScan vs Acunetix
Compared 9% of the time
Invicti vs Acunetix Logo
Invicti vs Acunetix
Compared 8% of the time
PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix Logo
PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix
Compared 5% of the time
More Acunetix Competitors
Invicti vs Synopsys API Security Testing Logo
Invicti vs Synopsys API Security Testing
Compared 100% of the time
More Synopsys API Security Testing Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Acunetix
August 2025
Acunetix reportDownload Acunetix product report
Buyer's Guide
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
August 2025
Synopsys API Security Testing reportDownload Synopsys API Security Testing 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

AppSec testing optimized for the needs of API developers
APIs provide open, flexible interfaces that enable applications and services to talk to each other. But these characteristics can also make it difficult to build secure software—and even more difficult for traditional AppSec tools to test it.

Black Duck
 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
Information Not Available
Buyer's Guide
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
August 2025
Download Free Report
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: August 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.