Acunetix vs Intruder
One of fourteen models named Acunetix first on the direct prompt; three named Intruder. Acunetix was named by thirteen of the fourteen models and Intruder by ten and Acunetix carries 39 labels and Intruder 13, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in four categories this edition.
Named in four categories this edition.
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the dynamic application security testing page.
By framing
AcunetixFirst choices, of fourteen modelsIntruder
Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, Acunetix and Intruder were named in the same answer thirty-three times, of the 125 answers naming Acunetix and the 231 naming Intruder. In those answers Intruder took the first choice twelve times and Acunetix two.
Every model, every framing
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | | ||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | |||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | ||||||
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | |||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | | | | ||
| Mistral Small | | |||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | | ||
| Kimi K2 | | |||||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | ||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-6 Luna | ||||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | |
Acunetix Intruder first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Acunetix on the left and Intruder on the right.The direct prompt
Acunetix first, Intruder not the choice
1 of 14 modelsIntruder was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Intruder first, Acunetix an alternative
3 of 14 modelsAcunetix was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Neither was the first choice, one was named
7 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Neither was named
3 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
Intruder16%#2 of 12Acunetix9%#4 of 12Acunetix12%#3 of 11Intruder6%#6 of 11What the models said about Acunetix
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“excellent for complex web applications with 12,000+ vulnerability types, but has a premium price and potential for false positives” Claude Haiku 4.5 · comparative prompt · soft negative
“The Verdict: Use with caution. It is a popular commercial tool, but it is notorious for being "noisy."” GLM 4.7 FlashX · negative prompt · soft negative
“Legacy versions struggle with SPAs, CAPTCHAs, and complex auth, leading to shallow coverage and noise.” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · soft negative
“my recommendation is Acunetix if you want a strong balance of broad web scanning, automation, and mid-market fit” Perplexity Sonar · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“For a B2B company specifically, I'd lean toward Acunetix due to its strong API security testing capabilities” MiniMax M2.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“If you want one name: Acunetix by Invicti is the safest recommendation for most mid-market B2B companies.” GPT-5.4 mini · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about Intruder
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. One of one in this category shown.
“If you need a tool that is easy to set up, offers good support, and doesn't require deep security expertise, Intruder is likely the best fit.” Mistral Small · direct prompt · first choice
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.