No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cequence Security vs Invicti comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Cequence Security
Ranking in API Security
6th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (24th), Bot Management (7th)
Invicti
Ranking in API Security
10th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (11th), Container Security (25th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (10th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the API Security category, the mindshare of Cequence Security is 4.9%, down from 9.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Invicti is 4.0%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Security Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cequence Security4.9%
Invicti4.0%
Other91.1%
API Security
 

Featured Reviews

Paulo Estevao - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Sales Engineer at e-Safer
Comprehensive API discovery has enabled us to block bots in real time and improve compliance reporting
Cequence Security can continue evaluating and evolving the machine learning and the AI that they have because attackers are using more AI, making it faster to learn how to attack APIs and business logic. When Cequence Security invests in their AI, they will provide quicker protection that our customers need, and the way that attackers think can be translated into security measures on Cequence Security workflows and baseline. They need to improve faster in the AI environment because the possibility of attackers is growing, which is something that must be improved continuously as we need quicker releases since the market demands it. Regarding accuracy and reliability, the AI has a baselining that allows it to learn from attacks, but it needs to improve more because in the Brazilian market, we have a creative environment for attackers who are familiar with the business logic of our customers, making it easier for them to imitate legitimate users during attacks. Thus, they need to enhance behavior analysis to differentiate themselves from all other products on the market. Latency can be a significant issue in bigger environments, especially since the architecture requires uninterrupted traffic to ensure customers can finish transactions. The defender component managing inline traffic holds all traffic and has mechanisms to control latency, allowing fallback during high-risk situations, but the sensor used for mirroring traffic is outdated and does not work properly.
PrashantUppuluri - PeerSpot reviewer
Solution Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Automated scanning has strengthened web application security and supports hybrid protection
A good scanning engine is what I appreciate about Invicti. When you want to find out the vulnerabilities within your web applications, Invicti has done a thorough job with respect to filtering out the vulnerabilities and identifying the risk factors with respect to the security modules within the solution. Invicti does have a segment of the solution which works on the automated scanning engine. As long as the license is active, the scanners that work within the solution are pretty effective. With respect to SAST and DAST, being a real-time scanning engine is one of the portfolios and one of the selling factors of the solution. Invicti is known to be a solution that works within the hybrid environment, be it cloud, on-premises, or a mix and match across multiple marketplaces. It does a thorough job. Most importantly, Invicti is a very good SAST and DAST solution that is very competitive in the market with respect to competitors. Invicti is a part of the Magic Quadrant with respect to Gartner's Magic Quadrant and has made a very good customer database and pipeline within the marketplace locally. With respect to security impacts in terms of support, Invicti is pretty much supportive. With respect to use cases or the POCs I have run on the solution, we have identified a couple of vulnerabilities and Invicti was able to trace them, detect, and quarantine the attacks.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cequence Security has positively impacted our organization by giving us a lot of visibility from the market point of view since it competes with much bigger companies such as Akamai, Salt, and Imperva."
"It uses machine learning algorithms to detect attacks and manage API inventory."
"I would tell potential users that it's really one of the best products in the market for web application security or Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)."
"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."
"I would rate the stability as ten out of ten."
"I'd recommend Netsparker for anyone who wants to make a security assessment for web applications."
"It correctly parses DOM and JS and has really good support for URL Rewrite rules, which is important for today's websites."
"I would definitely recommend it to those who really want to know in-depth details of their applications/products regarding security."
"The most valuable features that I've found in this solution was the level of accuracy and also that the process of scanning was very quick and we're easily able to change the frame of a scan."
"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."
 

Cons

"It is expensive."
"Latency can be a significant issue in bigger environments, especially since the architecture requires uninterrupted traffic to ensure customers can finish transactions."
"They don't really provide the proof of concept up to the level that we need in our organization. We are a consultancy firm, and we provide consultancy for the implementation and deployment solutions to our customers. When you run the scans and the scan is completed, it only shows the proof of exploit, which really doesn't work because the tool is running the scan and exploiting on the read-only form. You don't really know whether it is actually giving the proof of exploit. We cannot prove it manually to a customer that the exploit is genuine. It is really hard to perform it manually and prove it to the concerned development, remediation, and security teams. It is currently missing the static application security part of the application security, especially web application security. It would be really cool if they can integrate a SAS tool with their dynamic one."
"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 license could be better. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license. It's a major hindrance that we are facing while scanning applications, and we have to be sure that the URLs are the same and not different so that we do not end up consuming another license for it. Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. The licensing is tied to the URL, and it's restricted. If you have a URL that you scanned once, like a website, you cannot retry that same license. If you are scanning the same website but in a different domain or different URL, you might end up paying for a second license. It would also be better if they provided proper support for multi-factor authentications. In the next release, I would like them to include good multi-factor authentication support."
"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."
"When scanning a large web-based application, it tends to process slow and takes a long time especially on crawling and attacking part."
"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."
"It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities."
"They could enhance the support for data swap testing for the platform."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."
"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."
"It is competitive in the security market."
"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."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Security solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Computer Software Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cequence Security?
Cequence Security can continue evaluating and evolving the machine learning and the AI that they have because attackers are using more AI, making it faster to learn how to attack APIs and business ...
What is your primary use case for Cequence Security?
My main use case for Cequence Security is that my company is an integrator for Cequence Security, so we deliver this product to our customers in financial, banking, healthcare, and other sectors. A...
What advice do you have for others considering Cequence Security?
I can give Cequence Security a rating of 10 because this product genuinely makes a difference for our customers, and they do not need to lock in to Akamai does, which is significant for our custome...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?
The setup cost is pretty competitive. For example, if you want to talk about the SAST license, it comes to about $150 or sometimes less than $100, depending on the conversion or the number of licen...
What needs improvement with Invicti?
At this time, there is nothing that comes to mind. However, most of the products in the market are pretty much neck-to-neck competitors. Speaking about it, there are a couple of factors which they ...
What is your primary use case for Invicti?
I have worked on a couple of products, specifically in web application security. I have worked on Invicti, and with respect to PAM, I have worked with BeyondTrust. I have not worked specifically fo...
 

Also Known As

Cequence ASP, Cequence Unified API Protection Platform
Netsparker
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

T-Mobile, Lbrands, Ulta Beauty
Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Cequence Security vs. Invicti and other solutions. Updated: July 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.