Acunetix vs Invicti (2026): Same Company, Different Products - Which to Buy

If you are comparing Acunetix vs Invicti in 2026, start with the fact the vendors would rather you discover slowly: they are the same company. Both Acunetix and Invicti are products of Invicti Security, and they run the same proof-based scan engine - so their raw detection accuracy is effectively identical. The choice is not “which scanner is better” but “which packaging fits you.” Buy Acunetix if you are an SMB or single team that wants a simple standalone DAST scanner priced per domain. Buy Invicti if you are an enterprise that needs role-based access, on-prem deployment, bundled SCA, and a platform to centralise findings. That is the whole decision - the rest of this post explains the merger history and the details behind that call.

For the wider field - Burp, ZAP, Invicti, Acunetix and four more scanners with pricing - see our DAST tools comparison. For the paid-versus-free angle, read Acunetix vs OWASP ZAP. For the enterprise legacy-versus-modern angle, read HCL AppScan vs Invicti.

The short answer

• Acunetix - pick this if you are an SMB or single AppSec team that wants a standalone proof-based scanner with a simpler product surface and a lower entry price (per-FQDN, 5-target minimum). Same engine, less overhead.
• Invicti - pick this if you are an enterprise scanning 50+ targets and need role-based access, on-prem deployment, bundled SCA, ASPM, and enterprise support. You are paying for the platform around the engine, not a better engine.
• Both are scanners, not pentests - either one finds roughly 40% of what a manual web application penetration test finds. Use a scanner for continuous coverage, a pentest for depth.

Acunetix vs Invicti: head-to-head

Are Acunetix and Invicti the same company?

Yes, and this is the single most useful thing to understand before you compare features. The company now called Invicti Security was originally the maker of Netsparker, a proof-based DAST scanner. It acquired Acunetix, then folded both under one corporate umbrella and, in 2021, rebranded Netsparker itself as Invicti around the tagline “AppSec with zero noise.” Since then the parent has taken a USD 625 million growth investment led by Summit Partners and kept expanding - notably acquiring Kondukto in 2025 to add ASPM (Application Security Posture Management).

So the portfolio you are choosing between is two commercial scanners from one vendor:

• Acunetix - the former standalone product, kept as the SMB-facing scanner.
• Invicti - formerly Netsparker, now positioned as the enterprise platform.

They share the same proof-based scanning engine. That is why any honest comparison has to start by saying: you are not choosing between two detection technologies. You are choosing between two ways of packaging and pricing the same one.

Is Invicti the same as Netsparker?

Yes. Invicti is the rebranded Netsparker. If you have older documentation, procurement records, or a security team member who “used Netsparker at their last job,” they are describing what is now Invicti. Netsparker pioneered the proof-based scanning approach - safely attempting to confirm a vulnerability is real before reporting it, so the tool hands you verified findings instead of a pile of maybes. That capability carried straight into Invicti and, through the shared engine, into Acunetix too.

The naming can trip people up in search: “acunetix vs netsparker” is really “Acunetix vs Invicti,” and “acunetix invicti merger” is the corporate consolidation described above. All roads lead to the same parent.

So if the engine is identical, what actually differs?

The detection core is shared, so the differences live in everything wrapped around it. This is where the buying decision genuinely gets made.

• Target scale. Acunetix is aimed at SMBs and single teams - think a handful to a few dozen targets. Invicti is built for enterprises running 50+ scan targets across many teams, with the governance that implies.
• SCA and ASPM. Invicti bundles software composition analysis (dependency/known-CVE scanning) alongside DAST and IAST, and adds ASPM through the Kondukto acquisition to centralise findings from multiple security tools into one posture view. Acunetix has neither - it is DAST plus the AcuSensor IAST agent, and that is the scope.
• Access control and deployment. Invicti offers enterprise role-based access control and mature on-prem deployment for teams that cannot use SaaS. Acunetix keeps access simpler.
• Product surface. Acunetix deliberately packages the same scan accuracy into a simpler product for teams that want automated DAST without enterprise overhead. Invicti gives you the whole platform - and the whole platform’s complexity.

If you do not need SCA, ASPM, RBAC, or 50-target scale, you are paying Invicti prices for features you will not touch. That is the core case for Acunetix.

Do both cover the OWASP Top 10 and APIs?

Yes, to the same degree - because it is the same engine. Both detect the pattern-detectable OWASP Top 10 classes well and both test APIs from imported schemas. Here is the honest coverage mapping that applies to either product:

On APIs, both scan REST, GraphQL, and SOAP endpoints when you feed them an OpenAPI or schema definition, and the IAST sensors (AcuSensor on Acunetix, Invicti’s sensor on Invicti) sharpen coverage on supported runtimes like .NET, Java, PHP, and Node.js. The one genuine coverage difference is A06: Invicti’s bundled SCA gives it a real edge on vulnerable-component detection that standalone Acunetix does not match. Everything else is a wash, because it is one engine.

The pattern to read off that table is the same one that applies to every scanner: strong on injection and misconfiguration, weak or blind on broken access control, insecure design, and business logic. Those weak rows are exactly where the worst breaches come from, and no proof-based engine changes that - a web application pentest is what closes them.

Proof-based scanning: the shared strength

The feature both products lead with is proof-based scanning, inherited from Netsparker. Instead of flagging anything that matches a rule and leaving you to triage, the engine safely attempts to confirm exploitability first, then reports a verified finding. Invicti markets this around 99.98% accuracy on confirmed vulnerabilities and the phrase “AppSec with zero noise.”

For you, the practical payoff is the same whichever product you license: low false-positive overhead. Your team spends less time chasing findings that turn out to be nothing. That is the real reason to pay for either of these over a free scanner - not that they detect more classes, but that they hand you cleaner signal. It is also why, on a pure “which is more accurate” question, Acunetix and Invicti tie: the verification logic is shared.

The two pricing models

This is where the SMB-versus-enterprise split becomes concrete, because the products are priced differently, not just tiered differently.

• Acunetix uses per-FQDN (per-domain) licensing with a 5-target minimum on a 2-year subscription. Market figures put entry around USD 4,500-7,000 per year for a small target count, scaling with the number of domains. It is the predictable, self-serve-ish model - you know roughly what you will pay from your target count.
• Invicti uses custom enterprise pricing, quoted per application and negotiated. Once you factor in the bundled SCA, ASPM, RBAC, on-prem, and enterprise support, real-world Invicti deals commonly land at USD 15,000-25,000+ per year and climb from there with scale.

Neither vendor publishes a list price, and both typically involve multi-year commitments. The takeaway: Acunetix is the cheaper, simpler entry point; Invicti costs more because you are buying a platform. If your requirement is “scan my dozen domains and give me clean reports,” paying enterprise-platform pricing is waste.

Verdict by buyer type

• SMB or single team, cost matters: Acunetix. Same engine, simpler product, lower per-FQDN entry price. You get proof-based accuracy without paying for platform features you will not use.
• Startup or scale-up under ~50 targets: Acunetix, unless you specifically need bundled SCA or centralised posture management now - in which case weigh Invicti or a dedicated SCA tool alongside a free scanner.
• Enterprise, 50+ targets, multiple teams: Invicti. Role-based access, on-prem, bundled SCA, and ASPM to consolidate findings are the point. The engine is the same, but the governance layer is what enterprises are actually buying.
• Regulated UAE enterprise (bank, fintech, VARA-licensed): Invicti for the audit-ready platform and centralised evidence - plus mandatory manual penetration testing, because CBUAE, DFSA, and VARA expect human-led findings, not scanner output.
• Just need clean automated DAST, no platform: Acunetix. Do not over-buy the enterprise SKU for a scanner-shaped need.

What both scanners miss

Here is the part neither product page leads with. Acunetix and Invicti are both automated scanners, and automated scanning finds roughly 40% of what a manual web application penetration test finds. Proof-based scanning makes them accurate on the classes they can see - but it does nothing for the classes they cannot. They are weak or blind on exactly the flaws that cause the worst breaches:

• Broken access control - a scanner cannot know that user A should not see user B’s invoice. A human tester can.
• Business-logic flaws - price manipulation, workflow bypass, abuse of legitimate features. No proof-based check catches these.
• Chained exploits - three low-severity findings that combine into full account takeover. A scanner reports them as three separate low notes.
• Authorization edge cases - horizontal and vertical privilege escalation that only surfaces when a tester reasons about roles and state.

That is not a knock on either tool - it is the boundary of what automation does, shared engine or not. A scanner is the continuous, low-noise baseline. The serious findings, the ones that turn into breach headlines, come from a person driving the test. If you have run Acunetix or Invicti and want to know what they missed, a web application pentest from pentest.ae delivers exploited findings, business-impact proof, and a remediation-ready report - not raw scanner output. Book a free scope call.

Related reading

• Acunetix vs OWASP ZAP - the paid-versus-free angle, if budget is the real question
• HCL AppScan vs Invicti - legacy enterprise suite versus the proof-based scanner
• DAST tools comparison 2026 - Burp, ZAP, Invicti, Acunetix and four more scanners with pricing
• Penetration testing vs vulnerability assessment - where automated scanning ends and manual testing begins