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

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Software Risk Manager ASPM comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 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

PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (8th), Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
Software Risk Manager ASPM
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
29th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (21st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 2.4%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Software Risk Manager ASPM is 1.0%, 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 (%)
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional2.4%
Software Risk Manager ASPM1.0%
Other96.6%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

MH
Penetration Tester & Information Security Expert at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees
Dedicated browser and repeater have improved my proxy testing and manual vulnerability checks
I'm hoping perhaps for something to make it easier, such as to define things where if a message or a response is such and such, automatically make a request that is such and such. Perhaps something like this because otherwise, nowadays we have to do it manually. Perhaps they can automate it a bit more. Perhaps they could add some automation to things, to see what we do manually, which it has the tools to do manually, and perhaps enable with a click of a button to do things automatically. I'm not too sure which, but I'm sure they can from a product management point of view, do things that we need to do two, three, or four steps manually regarding specific testing. For instance, we want to check something specific if it's this or if it's that. Perhaps to define it once and have it more automatic, perhaps.
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 find the attack model quite amazing, where I can write my scripts and load my scripts as well, which helps quite a bit. All the active scanning that it can do is also quite a lot helpful. It speeds up our vulnerability assessment and penetration testing. Right now, I am enjoying its in-browser, which also helps quite a bit. I'm always confused about setting up some proxy, but it really is the big solution we all want."
"This solution has helped a lot in finding bugs and vulnerabilities, and the scanner is good enough for simple web apps."
"The reporting part is the most valuable. It also has very good features. We use almost all of the features for different kinds of customers and needs."
"It offers flexibility, macros, and features to reduce the effort required for authenticated sessions."
"In my area of expertise, I feel like it has almost everything I could possibly require at this moment."
"The product is very good just the way it is; It has everything already well established and functions great."
"It is a time-saver application."
"This solution has helped a lot in finding bugs and vulnerabilities, and the scanner is good enough for simple web apps."
"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

"BurpSuite has some issues regarding authentication with OAT tokens that need to be improved."
"One thing that is not up to the mark in PortSwigger is web application testing."
"One more thing they can improve is that despite having a good architecture, it needs a lot of specification."
"Sometimes the solution can run a little slow."
"Mitigating the issues and low confluence issues needs some improvement. Implementing demand with the ChatGPT under the web solution is an additional feature I would like to see in the next release."
"Even though I started working with PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, I think I may have run the Scanner once, but I prefer to run ZAP because I'm more used to it and I think it checks many more vulnerabilities."
"The Auto Scanning features should be updated more frequently and should include the latest attack vectors."
"There needs to be better documentation provided. Currently, we need to buy books, or we need to review online some use cases from other professionals who have been using the solution to find out their experience. It is not easy to find out how to properly do a security assessment."
"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

"The pricing of the solution is reasonable. We only need to pay for the annual subscription. I rate the pricing five out of ten."
"There is no setup cost and the cost of licensing is affordable."
"The cost is approximately $500 for a single license, and there are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fees."
"I rate the pricing a four out of ten."
"It's a lower priced tool that we can rely on with good standard mechanisms."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is expensive compared to other tools."
"It is a cheap solution, but it may not be cheaper than other solutions."
"The pricing of the solution is cost-effective and is best suited for small and medium-sized businesses."
"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 Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
University
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise35
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
What do you like most about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The solution helped us discover vulnerabilities in our applications.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The cost of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is reasonable at approximately $500 per year per user.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Burp
Code Dx
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
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 SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.