Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Acunetix vs Syft

Acunetix logo

Acunetix

Cybersecurity

Web application security testing made easy

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Syft logo

Syft

Cybersecurity

Generates a software bill of materials from images, filesystems and archives

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Syft has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Acunetix pricing available by quote only; no transparent pricing published online; Syft lockfile parsing can drop packages silently. An open issue filed in August 2026 reports the yarn v1 cataloguer returning 118 of 745 packages with no error raised, which means a complete bill of materials and an 84 percent incomplete one look identical to the caller.
  • They diverge on capability: Acunetix covers DAST scanning, Syft covers Multi-format output.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Acunetix and Syft actually diverge.

Attributes where Acunetix and Syft differ
AttributeAcunetixSyft
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelsubscriptionOpen source, no licence fee
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsDesktop, Web, ApimacOS, Linux, Windows, Docker
Founded2005Unknown

Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (Cybersecurity).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Acunetix

  • DAST scanning
  • IAST technology
  • AcuSensor
  • JavaScript security
  • SQL injection testing
  • XSS detection
  • OWASP Top 10
  • API security testing

Only in Syft

  • Multi-format output
  • Broad ecosystem coverage
  • Binary classifiers
  • In-toto attestations
  • Library and CLI
  • Pairs with Grype

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Acunetix

  • Scanning web applications for security vulnerabilitiesnot Syft
  • Testing APIs for exploitable weaknesses and threatsnot Syft
  • Automating dynamic application security testing (DAST)not Syft
  • Finding and validating security issues in production environmentsnot Syft

Syft

  • Producing a bill of materials for a customer or regulator that requires onenot Acunetix
  • Feeding an inventory into a vulnerability scanner rather than scanning images directlynot Acunetix
  • Recording what shipped in a build so a future disclosure can be answered quicklynot Acunetix
  • Public sector work where an SBOM is a contractual deliverablenot Acunetix

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Acunetix

  • Pricing available by quote only; no transparent pricing published online
  • Requires per-application licenses for comprehensive coverage
  • Scanning speed and feature depth depend on subscription tier
  • Advanced features like API security testing may require higher-tier plans

Syft

  • Lockfile parsing can drop packages silently. An open issue filed in August 2026 reports the yarn v1 cataloguer returning 118 of 745 packages with no error raised, which means a complete bill of materials and an 84 percent incomplete one look identical to the caller.
  • Fidelity varies sharply by ecosystem. Conan for C and C++, Haskell and Terraform get cataloguer support with no licence data, no dependency relationships and no file ownership, so a C and C++ shop gets the least from it.
  • Binary classification yields no licence or dependency metadata, and vendored or statically linked code is exactly where supply chain risk hides, so the blind spot and the risk overlap.
  • Incorrect CPE values and CPE collisions are recorded as open issues, and since Grype matches on CPE and PURL, an inventory error becomes a false negative in the security report downstream.
  • An inventory is not a risk assessment. Even a perfect bill of materials says a vulnerable version is present, never that the vulnerable function is called, and the triage burden lands entirely on the reader.

Pricing, plan by plan

Acunetix

On request
  • StandardFree
    • Single user
    • 5 targets
    • Scheduled scans
  • PremiumFree
    • Multiple users
    • Unlimited targets
    • CI/CD integration
  • Acunetix 360Free
    • Enterprise features
    • SDLC integration
    • Custom workflows

Syft

Free
  • SyftFree
    • Apache-2.0
    • No usage limits
    • Community support
  • Anchore Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Policy enforcement and reporting
    • Federal and commercial tiers
    • Pricing not published, quoted on request

Which should you pick?

Choose Acunetix if

  • You need dast scanning.
  • You work on Desktop, Web, Api.
  • You also want iast technology.
Acunetix review

Choose Syft if

  • You need multi-format output.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
  • You also want broad ecosystem coverage.
Syft review

Questions people ask

Is Acunetix or Syft better?
Neither clearly leads. Acunetix starts at On request and Syft at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Acunetix or Syft?
Syft has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Acunetix and Free for Syft.
Does Acunetix or Syft run on more platforms?
Acunetix runs on Desktop, Web, Api. Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
Can I use Syft for free?
Yes. Syft has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Acunetix starts at On request.
What is Acunetix best used for?
Acunetix is most often used for scanning web applications for security vulnerabilities, testing apis for exploitable weaknesses and threats, automating dynamic application security testing (dast), finding and validating security issues in production environments. Of those, scanning web applications for security vulnerabilities and testing apis for exploitable weaknesses and threats are not what Syft is typically brought in for.
What can Acunetix do that Syft cannot?
Acunetix covers DAST scanning, IAST technology, AcuSensor, JavaScript security. Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Acunetix: How much does Invicti (formerly Acunetix) cost?

Invicti pricing is available by quote based on your organization's needs, application count, and required features. The platform offers 8x faster scanning compared to competitors and detects 99.98% of exploitable vulnerabilities. Contact Invicti sales for a custom pricing proposal.

Source
Syft: Does Syft find vulnerabilities?

No. It produces an inventory. Grype, from the same company, matches that inventory against vulnerability feeds. They are separate tools and the distinction is frequently lost.

Syft: Does anything in the Anchore stack do reachability analysis?

No. Neither Syft, Grype nor the commercial Anchore platform performs call graph or reachability analysis, so none of them tells you whether a vulnerable code path is actually invoked.

Syft: Is it a CNCF or OpenSSF project?

No. It is single-vendor open source owned by Anchore, with no foundation governance. That is a different licence risk profile from Sigstore.

Syft: What does Anchore Enterprise cost?

Not published. The pricing page is contact-sales only, with named but unpriced commercial and federal tiers.

Syft: How do I know my SBOM is complete?

You largely cannot, which is the honest answer. Silent partial parsing is a known open defect, so a bill of materials used for compliance should be spot-checked against a known dependency list.

Share

Related pages

More on Acunetix

More on Syft

Keep looking

Other head to heads