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

Invicti Web + API vs Ixia BreakingPoint comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2026

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

Invicti Web + API
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (16th), Vulnerability Management (30th), DevSecOps (7th)
Ixia BreakingPoint
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
33rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Invicti Web + API is 2.6%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ixia BreakingPoint is 0.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Acunetix2.6%
Ixia BreakingPoint0.7%
Other96.7%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Rahul Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
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 Acunetix positively impacts my organization by helping identify outdated libraries and applications, including legacy applications vulnerable to old attacks based on OWASP Top 10, thus aiding in compliance checks for PCI DSS and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.
Sai Prasad - PeerSpot reviewer
Staff QA Engineer at Virsec
Works better for testing traffic, mix profile, and enrollment scenarios than other solutions
Once, when I raised a ticket regarding a hardware or software issue, the solution's support team visited our company to discuss and find out ways to solve the problem. Sometimes, they asked us to send several photos from the back and front end to identify the issue. It was time-consuming as we were occupied with some other testing simultaneously. Instead, it would have been great if they could have visited our company and rectified the problem.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The usability and overall scan results are good."
"After two years it's about 300%."
"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"The most important feature is that it's a web-based graphical user interface. That is a great addition. Also, the ability to schedule scans is great."
"It's a very easy deployment and easy application."
"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."
"I appreciate the features that Acunetix has for the speed and the fact that it is in the cloud, which does not put any resources in my network, so I can set up a scan, go to bed, come back, and see the reports in my email."
"There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades."
"The most valuable feature is Layer 7 traffic generation such as Facebook, Netflix, WhatsApp."
"I like that we can test cloud applications."
"The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use."
"The most valuable feature of Ixia BreakingPoint is the ransomware and malware database for simulated attacks."
"What Ixia BreakingPoint brings to the end customer is the use case."
"We use Ixia BreakingPoint for Layer 7 traffic generation. That's what we like."
"It is a scalable solution."
 

Cons

"Acunetix provides the benefit of saving time for an end user. I would not say it saves money because the cost and license of Acunetix is far more than what others offer."
"I rate its stability six out of ten."
"There are quite a few false positives that come out. It's mostly based upon finding XSS vulnerabilities, even though we know that XSS vulnerabilities do not exist within some of the web applications because of some frameworks we're using."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
"I believe Acunetix can improve customer support, as the dedicated support staff are often unfamiliar with problems and troubleshooting, leading to communication gaps that delay issue resolution."
"The solution should work on dealing with the number of false positives it delivers."
"However, their response is too slow."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"The solution originally was hard to configure; I'm not sure if they've updated this to make it simpler, but if not, it's something that could be streamlined."
"The production traffic simulations are not realistic enough for some types of DDoS attacks."
"The quality of the traffic generation could be improved with Ixia BreakingPoint, i.e. to get closer to being accurate in what a real user will do."
"The flash GUI has room for improvement."
"I would appreciate some preconfigured network neighborhoods, which are predefined settings for testing networks."
"The integration could improve in Ixia BreakingPoint."
"They should improve UI mode packages for the users."
"The SSL simulation is realistic but some kinds of tests work imperfectly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."
"The price is exceptionally high."
"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."
"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."
"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."
"When compared with other products, the pricing is a little bit high. But it gives value for the price. It serves the purpose and is worthwhile for the price we pay."
"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."
"There is no differentiation in licenses for Breaking Point. For one license, you will get all the features. There is no complexity in that."
"We have a one year subscription license for $25,000 US Dollars."
"The price is high. We pay for the license monthly."
"The solution is expensive."
"The price of the solution is expensive."
"or us, the pricing is somewhere around $12,000 a year. I'm unsure as to what new licenses now cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
918,169 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Construction Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
In a typical enterprise environment, Acunetix is mainly used for visibility, detection, and investigation across network traffic. The main use cases usually fall into a few core areas, with primary...
What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
I advise that Acunetix is the best option. Invest time in proper initial configuration and scope definitions. The tool is powerful, but its effectiveness depends heavily on how the authenticated ar...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Acunetix?
Everything is perfect and good, including the pricing and all related aspects.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
Corsa Technology
Find out what your peers are saying about Invicti Web + API vs. Ixia BreakingPoint and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
918,169 professionals have used our research since 2012.