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

Fortify Software Security Center vs Invicti Web + API 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

Fortify Software Security C...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
18th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
8
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
36
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 Fortify Software Security Center is 1.5%, up from 0.5% 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
ProductMindshare (%)
Acunetix2.6%
Fortify Software Security Center1.5%
Other95.9%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Diego Caicedo Lescano - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Innovation Officer at SAGGA
Enables centralized analysis and improves governance through seamless tool integration
The main use case for Fortify Software Security Center is exceptional because we have governance and control through that console. You can centralize both static analysis and dynamic analysis, and correlate both analyses in one tool to get better results by combining those independent results from each solution. That is outstanding, and there is no tool I have seen on the market that offers these capabilities. I appreciate the interoperability with other solutions from Fortify Software Security Center. Because we are using Kiuwan, you can run Kiuwan analyses and integrate them with Fortify Software Security Center to get those results in a single console. That is a good console for centralizing things in one point. That is one of the best features of the on-premises Fortify.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This is a stable solution at the end of the day."
"I like the explanation of issues provided by Fortify Software Security Center."
"It's very important because they want to scan their source code every day, so we provide CICD integration to our customers so they can auto build and auto test every day, get reports, and fix issues."
"You can easily download the tool's rule packs and update them."
"The reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."
"Software Security Center is highly customizable and helps me test all vulnerability data against the latest conventions like OWASP Top Ten, CVE Top twenty-five, and several other legal compliances."
"The main use case for Fortify Software Security Center is exceptional because we have governance and control through that console."
"Fortify Analytics' AI function helps scan and provides more detailed explanations and recommendations about vulnerabilities."
"It's a very easy deployment and easy application."
"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."
"The features of Acunetix have proved most effective in identifying vulnerabilities."
"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"The scalability is more than good; it can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have, and this solution is simple enough, especially with the cloud."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the speed at which it can scan multiple domains in just a few hours."
"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."
 

Cons

"Improvements needed for Software Security Center include better aggregation views of datasets."
"The support for Fortify on-premises is the same as for the other products. I would say the support is not good and I would rate it a three out of ten."
"We are having issues with false positives that need to be resolved."
"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."
"The initial setup of this solution is very complex. Specifically, the integration between other parts of the solution is difficult."
"This solution is difficult to implement, and it should be made more comfortable for the end-users."
"I am not satisfied with the percentage of false positives, which is around eighteen percent."
"The product's overlap feature is restrictive and requires more customization efforts, which can be expensive."
"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."
"One of the biggest problems I've had with Acunetix is that it's hard to replicate things manually because you don't get the raw packet."
"Improving the handling of false positives would be beneficial because it can be challenging to trust the findings flagged by Acunetix, and those findings must be manually validated."
"The jargon used makes it difficult for project managers to understand the issues, and the technical explanations used make it difficult for developers to understand issues. These things should be simplified much more. That would be very helpful for us when explaining to them what needs to be fixed. The report output needs to be simplified."
"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."
"Our experience with Acunetix has not been good, so we are in the process of switching solutions."
"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."
"You can't actually change your password after you've set it unless you go back into the administration account and you change it there. Thus, if you're locked out and don't remember your password, that's a thing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is priced fair."
"As a Fortify partner company providing technical support, I find the product expensive in our country, where local, inexpensive products are available."
"This is a costly solution that could be cheaper."
"Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."
"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."
"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."
"When we looked at all other vendors and what they were asking for, to provide a third of what Acunetix was capable of doing, it was an easy decision... But now that it's coming to a cost where it's line with market value, it becomes more of a competition... Acunetix is raising the cost of licensing. It's 3.5 times what we were initially quoted."
"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."
"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."
"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."
"The solution is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Software Security Center?
In my opinion, there are no areas that could be improved with Fortify Software Security Center. I would say it is a good product and a mature product. However, the SAST has many improvement areas. ...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Software Security Center?
We have installed Fortify Static Code Analysis, SAST, in Ecuador in two customers. The Fortify ScanCentral includes three components: SAST, Fortify Software Security Center, and the WebInspect.
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.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Software Security Center, Application Security Center, HPE Application Security Center, WebInspect
AcuSensor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Neosecure, Acxiom, Skandinavisk Data Center A/S, Parkeon
Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify Software Security Center vs. Invicti Web + API and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.