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

Invicti vs Software Risk Manager ASPM comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 21, 2025

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

Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto N...
Sponsored
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.5
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (28th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (13th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (18th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (13th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (12th), Software Supply Chain Security (8th), Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (7th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (5th)
Invicti
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (11th), Container Security (26th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (8th), API Security (9th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th)
Software Risk Manager ASPM
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
14th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (29th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (21st)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1980216 - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Development Manager For Palo Alto Networks at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Unified security platform has simplified multi-cloud protection and improved threat response
From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market. Additionally, there is not a clear MSP model compared to other vendors such as CrowdStrike. These are significant limitations, especially today when managed services are becoming increasingly important for end users. Palo Alto decided to limit some functionalities because they want to stress more on Cortex XSIAM. I do not agree with this strategy because Cortex XSIAM is a completely different market compared to Cortex XDR. This is the main issue of Cortex—the commercial model Palo Alto is implementing. The product is very good; the problem is the commercial model. There are probably some areas for improvement because Palo Alto is growing too much. Today the challenge is to have skilled people, which I believe is the same issue everywhere. I do not agree with this decision.
Valavan Sivgalingam - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Saravanan_Radhakrishnan - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager at Happiest Minds Technologies
Facilitates continuous assessment of applications, covering both static and dynamic security aspects
Code Dx lacks one aspect, the dynamic security part, known as DAST. It's not an on-premise solution; it's in the cloud now. There are compliance standards and data standards where the customer might need to have the data on-premises for dynamic security testing. So that is one shortfall. An area of improvement could be developing an on-premise DAST solution. The current one is a complete cloud-based solution, and that can be one of the areas of improvement.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I have absolutely seen improvements in our incident close rates, with mean time to detect and respond reduced significantly, sometimes by at least forty to fifty percent."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks has impacted our organization positively by keeping our machines secure and our team using the dashboard to find issues quickly."
"From a technical standpoint or pricing, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a stronger solution in the market at the moment compared to other products from ConnectWise or Symantec."
"The AI and automation features in detecting and responding to high-risk threats are impressive; it's one of the best tools regarding AI technology and unifies security in one platform in real-time, improving vulnerability analysis, incident response, and compliance reporting."
"I have seen several benefits from using Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks: It was easy to use and easy to migrate from the IBM platform."
"Overall, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a technically strong product, and I rate it ten out of ten."
"The most beneficial aspect of Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Palo Alto in general is that there is a single platform for all cloud providers for securitization."
"Invicti has done a commendable job with respect to ROI, and with respect to being a cost-effective solution and one of the market leaders as an effective solution for SAST and DAST, Invicti has performed very well."
"Invicti's best feature is the ability to identify vulnerabilities and manually verify them."
"It has a comprehensive resulting mechanism. It is a one-stop solution for all your security testing mechanisms."
"Netsparker provides a more interactive interface that is more appealing."
"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."
"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."
"The dashboard is really cool, and the features are really good. It tells you about the software version you're using in your web application. It gives you the entire technology stack, and that really helps. Both web and desktop apps are good in terms of application scanning. It has a lot of security checks that are easily customizable as per your requirements. It also has good customer support."
"The platform is stable."
"The customers were looking for something around static security and dynamic security, and in all those areas, they were looking for an industry leader with a proven solution. Synopsys is a Gartner leader, so I position this particular technology for the technical pre-sales part of it."
 

Cons

"Some aspects of the GUI can be confusing and make it difficult for me to find certain options or navigate where needed."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is creating some confusion in terms of names because this is recent."
"The negative aspects or areas for improvement in the product include the fact that the cost might be a bit high, which challenges commercials, but not technically."
"The pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions."
"Overall, I rate Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks as an eight out of ten. I think that it could improve on price, as I know that the Google solution has the best price, and this is one of the conditions."
"From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market."
"Asset scanning could be better. Once, it couldn't scan assets, and the issue was strange. The price doesn't fit the budget of small and medium-sized businesses."
"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 solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved."
"The support's response time could be faster since we are in different time zones."
"They need to improve their support in the documentation. Their support mechanism is missing. Their responsiveness, technical staff, and these types of things need to be improved, and comprehensive documentation is required. They should have good self-service portal enhancement"
"Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing."
"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."
"The initial setup is a bit challenging because things are not easy. It needs a lot of technology adaptability plus the customer's environment-specific use cases."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"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."
"The price should be 20% lower"
"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."
"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."
"It is more of an enterprise solution for budget-conscious customers. So, it's moderately priced. It's not for everybody."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Performing Arts
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
The solution is costly, with high-end capabilities suitable for enterprises. It is less affordable for startups or sm...
What needs improvement with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
Regarding areas for improvement, the tool performs its functions well, but frequent name changes across Palo Alto Net...
What is your primary use case for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks serves as our primary tool for understanding our assets and performing API integra...
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...
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-t...
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 r...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Netsparker
Code Dx
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank
Discover why companies like: CGI said, "Synopsys and Software Risk Manager have provided the results we’re looking for".
Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, Snyk, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM). Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.