Contrast Security Assess vs Invicti comparison

Read 31 Invicti reviews

3,717 Views
2,379 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Invicti and Contrast Security Assess compete in the application security solutions category. Invicti is generally favored for its cost-effectiveness and support quality, while Contrast Security Assess stands out for its robust features offering comprehensive security solutions.

Features: Invicti offers automated security testing, efficient vulnerability detection, and thorough reporting. Contrast Security Assess provides real-time application security monitoring, integration into the software development lifecycle, and continuous assessment for proactive management.

Room for Improvement: Invicti could improve integration with development tools, streamline user interfaces, and enhance scalability options. Contrast Security Assess could offer clearer guidance, simplify its learning curve, and reduce initial setup complexity.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Invicti is known for easy deployment and reliable customer support, suitable for a wide range of teams. Contrast Security Assess has a complex deployment but ensures comprehensive support for its advanced features.

Pricing and ROI: Invicti has lower setup costs and users report a favorable ROI. Contrast Security Assess might have higher initial costs but delivers significant returns over time with enhanced security features.

To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. Invicti Report (Updated: March 2026).

Contrast Security Assess vs. Invicti

Download the complete report

Helped 884,873 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

Contrast Security Assess

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

27th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (29th)

Invicti

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

11th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Container Security (25th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (8th), API Security (8th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 1.0%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Invicti is 1.5%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Invicti	1.5%
Contrast Security Assess	1.0%
Other	97.5%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

reviewer1605099

Director of Threat and Vulnerability Management at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees

We're gathering vulnerability data from multiple environments in real time, fundamentally changing how we identify issues in applications

The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of. Assess also provides the option of helping developers incorporate security elements while they're writing code. It depends on whether individual developers decide to utilize the information that's provided to them from the solution, but it definitely gives them visibility into more environments. It gives them an opportunity to remediate vulnerabilities well before production deployments.

Read full review

Valavan Sivgalingam

Senior Manager, Security Engineering at ESS

Dynamic testing regularly identifies web vulnerabilities and has strong false positive confirmations

It has good false positive confirmations, confirmed issues identification, and proof of exploit-related features as part of it. We use Invicti for these things in our portfolios. The solution includes Proof-Based Scanning technology. Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios. For both the API endpoints and web applications, we do regular testing on a monthly basis for all our releases. Invicti does a good job. The only concern is on the performance side, but other than that, we find it really helpful in identifying web vulnerabilities. A full scan takes more time based on your website and other factors, but for us, it takes more than two to three days. The scan performance can be improved upon. When we check with them, they discuss proof-based scanning and related aspects. However, there could be intermittent results that could help us.

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

"By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."

"Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs."

"I am impressed with the product's identification of alerts and vulnerabilities."

"We use the Contrast OSS feature that allows us to look at third-party, open-source software libraries, because it has a cool interface where you can look at all the different libraries. It has some really cool additional features where it gives us how many instances in which something has been used... It tells us it has been used 10 times out of 20 workloads, for example. Then we know for sure that OSS is being used."

"This has changed the way that developers are looking at usage of third-party libraries, upfront. It's changing our model of development and our culture of development to ensure that there is more thought being put into the usage of third-party libraries."

"The most valuable feature is the continuous monitoring aspect: the fact that we don't have to wait for scans to complete for the tool to identify vulnerabilities. They're automatically identified through developers' business-as-usual processes."

"The accuracy of the solution in identifying vulnerabilities is better than any other product we've used, far and away. In our internal comparisons among different tools, Contrast consistently finds more impactful vulnerabilities, and also identifies vulnerabilities that are nearly guaranteed to be there, meaning that the chance of false positives is very low."

"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"NetSparker is a very easy to use and understand product."

"Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment."

"It has improved the security of our code by scanning it and finding security defects."

"Its ability to crawl a web application is quite different than another similar scanner."

"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."

"The scanner and the result generator are valuable features for us."

"Netsparker has valuable features, including the ability to scan our website, an interactive approach, and security data integration."

"It has very good integration with the CI/CD pipeline."

More Invicti pros

Cons

"The solution needs to improve flexibility...The scalability of the product is a problem in the solution, especially from a commercial perspective."

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"The out-of-the-box reporting could be improved. We need to write our own APIs to make the reporting more robust."

"The product's retesting part needs improvement. The tool also needs improvement in the suggestions provided for fixing vulnerabilities. It relies more on documentation rather than on quick fixes."

"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

"Personalization of the board and how to make it appealing to an organization is something that could be done on their end. The reports could be adaptable to the customer's preferences."

"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."

"Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"When scanning a large web-based application, it tends to process slow and takes a long time especially on crawling and attacking part."

"The solution needs to make a more specific report."

"The support's response time could be faster since we are in different time zones."

"Right now, they are missing the static application security part, especially web application security."

"Maybe the ability to make a good reporting format is needed."

"Perhaps the custom attack preparation screen might be improved."

"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."

More Invicti cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

"The solution is expensive."

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."

"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."

"It is competitive in the security market."

"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."

"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"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."

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."

More Invicti 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

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

20%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	13

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Veracode vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% of the time

Digital.ai Application Security vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 4% of the time

SonarQube vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 4% of the time

FortiDevSec vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 4% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs Invicti

Compared 8% of the time

SonarQube vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

Rapid7 InsightAppSec vs Invicti

Compared 4% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

Product Reports

Contrast Security Assess

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Download Invicti product report

Also Known As

Contrast Assess

Netsparker

Overview

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Contrast Security

Invicti helps DevSecOps teams automate security tasks and save hundreds of hours each month by identifying web vulnerabilities that matter. Combining dynamic with interactive testing (DAST + IAST) and software composition analysis (SCA), Invicti scans every corner of an app to find what other tools miss with 99.98% accuracy, delivering on the promise of Zero Noise AppSec. Invicti helps discover all web assets — even ones that are lost, forgotten, or created by rogue departments. With an array of out-of-the-box integrations, DevSecOps teams can get ahead of their workloads to hit critical deadlines, improve processes, and communicate more effectively while reducing risk and hitting the ROI goals.

Sample Customers

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank

Contrast Security Assess vs. Invicti