Same-subcategory comparison

Invicti PlatformvsMend AppSec

Compare buyer fit, pricing, capability depth, and purchase constraints within one buying category. A higher score is not a universal winner.

Comparison summary

How to choose

These conclusions apply to this subcategory and the buyer conditions shown here. They do not make one product universally better.

Invicti Platform

Consider when

Enterprise AppSec teams prioritizing proof-based DAST and API security
Programs consolidating code, dependency, container, IaC, secrets, and runtime findings

Check before choosing

Buyers requiring published numeric pricing or a permanent free plan
Small teams seeking the separate Acunetix product rather than an enterprise AppSec platform

Full profile

Mend AppSec

Consider when

Mid-market and enterprise AppSec programs consolidating SAST, SCA, and container-image security
Organizations prioritizing reachable and exploitable open-source and container risk

Check before choosing

Teams requiring a permanent free production plan
Buyers requiring a published minimum price or deterministic total before contacting sales

Full profile

Dimension	Invicti Platform	Mend AppSec
Pricing and trial	Web + API Requires quote · custom quote AppSec Core Requires quote · custom quote AppSec Flex Requires quote · custom quote Web + API covers DAST-led web and API testing. AppSec Core adds code, supply-chain, and posture-management scope. AppSec Flex adds enterprise integrations, governance, and flexible deployment. Agentic Pentest, professional services, Premium Support, and Guided Success are not core plans. Invicti on AWS Marketplace: Invicti offers public and private AWS Marketplace procurement. The listing's public numeric dimensions are legacy Invicti Enterprise, Acunetix, support, or standalone ASPM entries rather than current Web + API, AppSec Core, or AppSec Flex offers, so none are repeated here. Full profile	Mend AppSec 1000 · per contributing developer · per year · Up to the displayed rate for each contributing developer, as defined by Mend.io Mend AppSec is the core paid offer and is listed at up to $1,000 per contributing developer per year. The page defines contributing developers broadly to include platform users and people who write or modify scanned code, without double-counting one person in multiple roles. Code size, scan count, and application count do not limit the core per-developer price. The exact customer amount, currency code, billing schedule, commitment, minimum quantity, renewal, support level, implementation amount, and discount method are not published. Mend AI Core, Mend AI Premium, DAST, API Security, EOL Support, hosting, services, and custom agreements can add cost. Mend.io AppSec Platform on AWS Marketplace: A distinct AWS Marketplace route for acquiring the Mend.io AppSec Platform. No separate marketplace amount or commercial term is retained because the public listing does not bind one to the current core offer. Full profile
Best for	Enterprise AppSec teams prioritizing proof-based DAST and API security Programs consolidating code, dependency, container, IaC, secrets, and runtime findings DevSecOps organizations needing CI/CD orchestration and two-way remediation workflows	Mid-market and enterprise AppSec programs consolidating SAST, SCA, and container-image security Organizations prioritizing reachable and exploitable open-source and container risk Developer-led programs using IDE, repository, pull-request, CI/CD, ticket, and coding-agent workflows
Not for	Buyers requiring published numeric pricing or a permanent free plan Small teams seeking the separate Acunetix product rather than an enterprise AppSec platform Buyers unwilling to validate plan-specific IAST, target, deployment, support, and service scope through sales	Teams requiring a permanent free production plan Buyers requiring a published minimum price or deterministic total before contacting sales Programs that need DAST, API Security, EOL Support, or advanced Mend AI entitlements inside the core price
Source check	98/100	98/100
Key features	Proof-based DAST with runtime validation Multilayer API discovery and stateful API security testing Partner-supplied SAST with DAST and IAST runtime correlation Static and dynamic SCA, container security, IaC scanning, secrets detection, and SBOM with VEX ASPM, vulnerability management, deduplication, prioritization, and compliance reporting	Mend SAST for human-written and AI-generated code with secrets detection, contextual prioritization, triage, and AI-powered fixes Mend SCA reachability, CVSS and EPSS context, malicious-package intelligence, license compliance, SBOM, VEX, and policy enforcement Mend Container image, registry, Kubernetes, reachability, secrets, vulnerability, policy, and reporting workflows Automated dependency pull requests and update-safety workflows through Mend Renovate functionality AI component and framework discovery, Shadow AI inventory, and AI-BoMs with platform enablement
Cons	No public numeric core-plan price, minimum, contract commitment, payment timing, renewal term, or implementation amount IAST is documented at platform level but not mapped to a current named plan SAST is partner-supplied, so engine coverage and entitlement should be confirmed	The $1,000 figure is an upper-bound annual rate, not a fixed or minimum customer price Currency code, billing schedule, commitment, minimum quantity, discount method, renewal, implementation amount, and exact support entitlement are not public The contributing-developer definition includes platform users and people who write or modify scanned code
Category buying score	81Joint highest score	81Joint highest score
Rank	#3	#4
Context	Security & Privacy / Application Security Testing Software	Security & Privacy / Application Security Testing Software
Accuracy and validation	88Reduces false positives using proof-based dynamic testing and correlating runtime behaviors with static code findings.	82Reachability analysis, malicious-package intelligence, contextual prioritization, and triage workflows help validate which findings matter, subject to language, package manager, integration, and build-context support boundaries.
Testing scope and depth	86Spans web, API, code, and infrastructure artifacts, though IAST plan availability is unconfirmed and SAST requires a third-party partner engine.	85Testing depth covers SAST, SCA reachability and license analysis, container image/registry/Kubernetes workflows, secrets detection, and AI component discovery, but does not establish core DAST or API Security coverage.
Developer workflow	81Pipeline orchestration and two-way remediation into issue trackers can keep developers inside existing tools, provided SSO, CI/CD connectors, and tracker links are implemented for each team.	87IDE, repository, pull-request, CI/CD, ticket, package-manager, and coding-agent touchpoints let developers receive findings and dependency update PRs in existing delivery channels rather than only in a central security UI.
Remediation quality	80Two-way remediation workflows, issue tracking, and runtime prioritization support practical follow-through on findings. The score is moderated because the exact remediation workflow depth and any bundled services must be confirmed in the quoted edition.	81Provides reliable automated dependency PRs through native Renovate capabilities, while AI-generated code remediations require human verification before implementation.
Risk prioritization	84Runtime prioritization, ASPM correlation, and vulnerability management supply risk context across findings, while Flex can add CSPM, infrastructure VM, and bug-bounty sources when those systems are connected.	85Shared risk context combining reachability, CVSS, EPSS, malicious-package data, and application/project grouping helps prioritize exploitable open-source and container issues over raw severity lists.
Governance and integrations	78AppSec Flex adds CSPM, infrastructure vulnerability-management, and bug-bounty integrations, which can extend governance input into AST operations. The score stays below the top range because those integrations require compatible external systems and are not part of the base core scope.	81Policy enforcement, workflows, roles, APIs, and connections into repositories, CI/CD, and tickets support governance inside delivery systems, with hybrid or self-hosted setups still needing architecture and connectivity planning.
Support and total cost	58All current plans require a quote, and the supplied facts do not state public prices, commitments, minimums, or payment timing, which makes support and total cost hard to model upfront. Premium Support, Guided Success, and professional services are not established as core-plan inclusions, so buyers need a sales check to compare full ownership cost.	59The core offer is priced at up to $1,000 per contributing developer per year, but add-ons, separate packaging, deployment choices, and undisclosed commercial terms make total cost and support burden harder to predict from the public offer alone.
Full profile	Full profile	Full profile

Comparison summary

Most material score differences

These are the stored dimension rationales returned with each score. They explain the buyer conditions behind the gap without speculating about hidden model reasoning.

Accuracy and validation

6 pts

Invicti Platform · 88/100: Reduces false positives using proof-based dynamic testing and correlating runtime behaviors with static code findings.
Mend AppSec · 82/100: Reachability analysis, malicious-package intelligence, contextual prioritization, and triage workflows help validate which findings matter, subject to language, package manager, integration, and build-context support boundaries.

Developer workflow

6 pts

Invicti Platform · 81/100: Pipeline orchestration and two-way remediation into issue trackers can keep developers inside existing tools, provided SSO, CI/CD connectors, and tracker links are implemented for each team.
Mend AppSec · 87/100: IDE, repository, pull-request, CI/CD, ticket, package-manager, and coding-agent touchpoints let developers receive findings and dependency update PRs in existing delivery channels rather than only in a central security UI.

Governance and integrations

3 pts

Invicti Platform · 78/100: AppSec Flex adds CSPM, infrastructure vulnerability-management, and bug-bounty integrations, which can extend governance input into AST operations. The score stays below the top range because those integrations require compatible external systems and are not part of the base core scope.
Mend AppSec · 81/100: Policy enforcement, workflows, roles, APIs, and connections into repositories, CI/CD, and tickets support governance inside delivery systems, with hybrid or self-hosted setups still needing architecture and connectivity planning.

Research basis

This page uses stored product facts, official evidence, and category scoring rationales. It is not an account-based hands-on test, and third-party user ratings are not folded into the category buying score.

Invicti Platform: Fact confidence: 98% · Fact checked: 2026-08-10
Mend AppSec: Fact confidence: 98% · Fact checked: 2026-08-12

More tools

Application Security Testing Software

Add more tools from the same subcategory to this comparison. The page keeps up to 6 tools.

Snyk AI Security Platform

Snyk AI Security Platform combines Snyk Code SAST, Snyk Open Source SCA, Snyk Container, and Snyk IaC with IDE, repository, pull-request, CLI, CI/CD, prioritization, remediation, reporting, and enterprise governance workflows.

HCL AppScan

HCL AppScan is an application security testing family spanning hosted and self-managed SAST, DAST, IAST, SCA, API, secrets, container, and infrastructure-as-code testing with developer workflows, centralized risk management, and remediation guidance.

Invicti Platform

Invicti Platform is a DAST-first application security testing and posture management platform that combines web and API testing, proof-based runtime validation, SAST, SCA, container and infrastructure-as-code scanning, secrets detection, ASPM, and developer workflow automation.

81Compared

Mend AppSec

Mend AppSec is Mend.io's application security platform for SAST, SCA, container-image scanning, AI-assisted code security, dependency updates, risk prioritization, policy enforcement, and reporting across developer workflows.

81Compared

OpenText Fortify Application Security Testing

OpenText Fortify Application Security Testing is a modular enterprise AppSec portfolio and governance platform spanning static, dynamic, open-source, API, mobile, and managed testing workflows.

Semgrep AppSec Platform

Semgrep AppSec Platform unifies Semgrep Code SAST, Semgrep Supply Chain SCA, and Semgrep Secrets with Pro Engine analysis, AI-assisted triage and remediation, policy controls, developer integrations, reporting, and managed or customer-run scanning.

Veracode Application Risk Management Platform

Veracode is a modular cloud-native application risk management platform with separately licensed SAST, DAST, SCA, and container/IaC capabilities, plus platform governance, developer integrations, optional AI remediation, and separately scoped expert services.

Black Duck Polaris Platform

Black Duck Polaris Platform is a cloud-native SaaS application security platform that combines Polaris fAST Static, fAST SCA, and fAST Dynamic with IaC analysis, secrets detection, DevOps integrations, centralized policy, risk scoring, dashboards, and reporting.

GitHub Advanced Security

GitHub Advanced Security is GitHub's application-security product family. Its current standalone offers are GitHub Secret Protection for secret detection and prevention, and GitHub Code Security for CodeQL scanning, premium dependency security, Copilot Autofix, and organization-level security workflows.

#10

Checkmarx One

Checkmarx One is an enterprise application security platform that combines configurable SAST, SCA, API security, DAST, IaC, container, supply-chain, runtime, ASPM, and AI-assisted remediation capabilities in shared developer and governance workflows.

More comparisons