Checkmarx SAST vs Invicti Web + API comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Checkmarx and Invicti are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Checkmarx is ranked #21 with an average rating of 7.7, while Invicti is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0. Checkmarx holds a 2.3% mindshare in SAST, compared to Invicti’s 2.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Checkmarx users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of Invicti users who would recommend it.

Checkmarx SAST

Read 5 Checkmarx SAST reviews

5,144 Views
5,093 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Invicti Web + API

Read 36 Invicti Web + API reviews

12,369 Views
6,308 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Checkmarx SAST

Invicti Web + API

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 2026

Acunetix and Checkmarx SAST are competitors in security tools. Acunetix holds the edge with its cost-effectiveness and ease of use, while Checkmarx SAST is preferred for its extensive features and deep integration, despite its higher price.

Features: Acunetix offers comprehensive scanning capabilities, delivering precise vulnerability assessments with minimal false positives. It supports both on-premises and cloud deployments, ensuring flexibility and ease of use. The continuous scanning feature in Acunetix provides an efficient way to identify vulnerabilities proactively. Checkmarx SAST provides deep integration into the software development lifecycle, focusing on code-level analysis. It supports a variety of modern programming languages, providing exhaustive security insights. Its AI-enabled platform allows for seamless integration of SAST, DAST, and other essential security tools.

Room for Improvement: Acunetix could enhance its integration capabilities with more varied development tools, improve its user interface for even better ease of use, and reduce any remaining false positives. Checkmarx SAST should work on reducing false positives for more accurate vulnerability reporting, streamline its deployment process for smaller organizations, and expand language support to cover all programming languages.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix is known for its straightforward deployment process, with responsive customer support ensuring quick resolutions. It suits organizations looking for immediate implementation. Checkmarx SAST requires a more comprehensive setup suited for larger companies. Its support, while efficient, demands more involvement due to its complexity.

Pricing and ROI: Acunetix provides a cost-effective solution with a high return on investment through efficient scanning technology, offering budget-friendly pricing. Checkmarx SAST, although higher in initial cost, justifies the investment with a robust feature set and long-term security management benefits. Organizations need to balance immediate savings against potential long-term advantages.

To learn more, read our detailed Checkmarx SAST vs. Invicti Web + API Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx SAST vs. Invicti Web + API

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 917,433 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

Checkmarx SAST

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

21st

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Invicti Web + API

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

11th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (16th), Vulnerability Management (30th), DevSecOps (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Checkmarx SAST is 2.3%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Invicti Web + API is 2.6%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Acunetix	2.6%
Checkmarx SAST	2.3%
Other	95.1%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Tharindu Malwenna

Senior Application Security Engineer at a newspaper with 5,001-10,000 employees

Has supported early vulnerability detection but requires tuning to reduce false positives and scanning delays

When assessing the accuracy and efficiency of Checkmarx SAST scanning capabilities, they are currently recommending that doing the full scan is the main, correct way of scanning the repositories. However, based on the repository size we have, it sometimes takes more than 10 minutes for larger repositories, which is a downside. The accuracy of the results depends on various factors, as some of the test folders tend to give us false positives, which makes a huge impact on the vulnerabilities. Those are the major things that we have to fine-tune from our end. I would rate Checkmarx SAST around a seven, as it does have some false positives we have to work with, which are the major concerning things. The number of false positives is significant because we cannot implement policies because of this.

Read full review

Rahul Kumar

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.

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

"The CX1 is a unified platform that covers all components such as SAST, SCA, DAST, container scanning, and infrastructure code, which is quite beneficial because some clients need one-stop solutions for all their needs."

"The most important feature is that Checkmarx protects our company against attacks."

"The most important competitive advantage and benefit is the ability to identify vulnerabilities in the source code immediately without needing to complete the coding."

"The detailed reports from Checkmarx SAST help with our security process by showing details about which line is actually vulnerable, which is beneficial for the developers, and I do not have any suggestions or inputs on that area."

"This helps us a lot in identifying vulnerabilities in early stages, and the integration within the IDEs helps developers get the results into their IDE itself, making it easier for them to fix vulnerabilities."

"The automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment."

"Segregation of reports is really, really good with Acunetix; it provides us with a lot of in-depth details."

"It has been able to find some vulnerabilities, and we've been able to remediate our websites and vulnerabilities, thanks to Acunetix."

"I find it to be one of the most comprehensive tools, with support for manual intervention."

"It's a very easy deployment and easy application."

"Acunetix is the best service in the world. It is easy to manage. It gives a lot of information to the users to see and identify problems in their site or applications. It works very well."

"The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code."

"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."

More Invicti Web + API pros

Cons

"The main challenge with Checkmarx SAST is the price. The price is a challenge because Checkmarx SAST is a very big brand, and many mid-sized companies cannot afford it as they are very price-conscious."

"We had some issues where Checkmarx did not recognize a vulnerability. We had to talk with the vendor, and they had to include an improvement in the tool to resolve this issue."

"I believe that nothing in particular could be improved about Checkmarx SAST, only the turnaround time and the fact that technical account managers keep moving around, which leads to some lag in communication."

"The accuracy of the results depends on various factors, as some of the test folders tend to give us false positives, which makes a huge impact on the vulnerabilities."

"The on-premises version is more expensive compared to the cloud version."

"There was an issue related to updates from the internet."

"The solution should work on dealing with the number of false positives it delivers."

"However, it doesn't seem very helpful or useful for scanning web services, and that has what I feel that the organization could work better on that."

"I rate its stability six out of ten."

"Our experience with Acunetix has not been good, so we are in the process of switching solutions."

"We have had issues during upgrades where their scans worked on some apps better with previous versions. Then, we had to work with their tech support, who were great, to get it fixed for the next version."

"The time to fix issues is not too quick, so in the case of time-restricted projects for some customers, this might become a problem."

"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."

More Invicti Web + API cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."

"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."

"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."

"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."

"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."

"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."

"The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable."

"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."

More Invicti Web + API 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

917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Outsourcing Company

Manufacturing Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Comms Service Provider

11%

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	18
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	19

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Checkmarx SAST?

We were users in a small country, and we paid one consolidated bill for all the tools, so I don't know the specific amount for Checkmarx.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Checkmarx SAST?

I believe that nothing in particular could be improved about Checkmarx SAST, only the turnaround time and the fact that technical account managers keep moving around, which leads to some lag in com...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Checkmarx SAST?

I manage the application security side of the products here, currently utilizing solutions such as Checkmarx, Akamai, Traceable, and Invicti, which are the security scanning tools that we use. In t...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Acunetix?

Everything is perfect and good, including the pricing and all related aspects.

See all answers

Comparisons

Checkmarx One vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 13% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 9% of the time

Snyk vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 8% of the time

SonarQube vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 7% of the time

Veracode vs Checkmarx SAST

Compared 6% of the time

More Checkmarx SAST Competitors

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Invicti Web + API

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Invicti Web + API

Compared 5% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Invicti Web + API

Compared 4% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Invicti Web + API

Compared 4% of the time

Invicti vs Invicti Web + API

Compared 3% of the time

More Invicti Web + API Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx SAST

October 2026

Download Checkmarx SAST product report

Buyer's Guide

Invicti Web + API

October 2026

Download Invicti Web + API product report

Also Known As

SAST

AcuSensor

Overview

Checkmarx SAST provides advanced static application security testing by identifying vulnerabilities in source code. It's ideal for ISOs, security professionals, and developers striving to secure applications during development.

Checkmarx SAST is known for its powerful code scanning capabilities that integrate seamlessly into existing development environments. It supports a wide range of programming languages, which makes it applicable for diverse development projects. Some users suggest improvements in the scan performance speed and enhanced support in handling false positives to further optimize workflow efficiency.

What are the standout features of Checkmarx SAST?

Language Support: Offers broad language support catering to multiple coding frameworks.
Integration Flexibility: Seamlessly integrates with existing CI/CD pipelines and developer tools.
Comprehensive Scanning: Detects security vulnerabilities early in the development process.
Detailed Reporting: Provides comprehensive reports that help prioritize remediation efforts.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Improved Security Posture: Enhances application security by catching vulnerabilities early.
Cost Efficiency: Reduces costs associated with post-deployment issue resolution.
Developer Empowerment: Allows developers to identify and fix issues independently.
Regulatory Compliance: Assists in meeting compliance requirements efficiently.

Implemented across various industries, Checkmarx SAST supports sectors like finance, healthcare, and technology with their stringent security requirements. By integrating seamlessly into existing workflows, it ensures that applications remain secure while not disrupting industry-specific processes.

Checkmarx

Acunetix is a robust web application security testing tool offering rapid scanning, user-friendly interfaces, and accurate vulnerability detection with minimal false positives. It supports both cloud and on-premises deployment, making it versatile for various security needs.

Acunetix is distinguished by its capability to identify critical vulnerabilities such as cross-site scripting and SQL injection with high precision. It integrates seamlessly with CI/CD tools, supporting continuous scanning and large-scale application management. The centralized dashboard and detailed automated reporting streamline operations. Despite its benefits, users suggest improvements like reducing false positives, flexible pricing, and enhanced API scanning. Better integration with platforms like GitHub and Azure DevOps is sought, alongside more comprehensive customization and faster scanning. Mobile application scanning and improved team collaboration tools are also desired.

What features make Acunetix stand out?

Rapid Scanning: Delivers fast and comprehensive security assessments.
User-Friendliness: Intuitive interface simplifies operations for diverse teams.
Detailed Reporting: Automated reports enhance vulnerability management.
High Accuracy: Detects vulnerabilities with minimal false positives.
CI/CD Integration: Seamless integration supports continuous development processes.

What benefits should users consider when evaluating?

Vulnerability Detection: Critical for identifying potential security threats efficiently.
Flexibility: Supports both cloud and on-premises environments.
Compliance Support: Aids in meeting standards like PCI DSS.
Scalability: Capable of handling large-scale web applications.

Acunetix is widely implemented across industries undertaking web application security assessments, including those requiring penetration testing and vulnerability assessment. It ensures applications meet security protocols and complies with standards while fitting into CI/CD workflows for secure pre-release checks.

Invicti

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand

Buyer's Guide

Checkmarx SAST vs. Invicti Web + API

September 2026

Free Report: Checkmarx SAST vs. Invicti Web + API

Find out what your peers are saying about Checkmarx SAST vs. Invicti Web + API and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Checkmarx SAST vs. Invicti Web + API report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.