Invicti
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Invicti? The following comparison table enables you to discern
the performance of both providers across various attributes essential for meeting your company’s cybersecurity
needs. To better understand each attribute, read their descriptions in the dedicated page.
Organization
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Invicti
|
|
Focus
|
Native ASPM with in-house scanners
|
||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
Run-time SCA
|
|
Headcount
|
320 | ||
|
Headcount distribution
|
Engineering 42%, IT 13%, sales 13%,
marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 26%
|
Engineering 26%, IT 19%, sales 13%,
marketing 3%, operations 4% and others 35%
|
|
|
Headcount growth
|
+8%, +10%, -8%
|
+3%, +3%, +1%
|
|
|
Headquarters
|
CO and US
|
MT, TR and US
|
|
|
Countries
|
AR, BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and
US
|
MT, TR and US
|
|
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
9.11 from 279 reviews over 9 years on
Capterra, G2, Gartner, PeerSpot and TrustRadius
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
33K based on the following: Facebook,
Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube
|
|
|
Research firms
|
None
|
None
|
Frost & Sullivan and IDC
|
|
Founded
|
2001 |
2018
|
|
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
No information available
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
Acquired 1 time and made 2 acquisitions
|
|
Revenue
|
10M to 15M
|
10M to 95M
|
|
|
CVEs as CNA Researcher
|
Not applicable, as it is not a CNA
Researcher
|
||
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
ISO/IEC 27001 and SOC 2 Type II
|
|
|
Bug bounty
|
No
|
||
|
Visits
|
21K
per month. Top 3: 26% CO, 8% FR, 7% US. Others 59%
|
168K per month. Top 3: 18% IN, 15% US,
4% UK. Others 63%
|
|
|
Authority
|
44 out of 100
|
||
|
Public vulnerability DB
|
Discovered and third-party
|
Discovered
|
|
|
Content
|
Same
|
Blog, case studies, documentation,
podcasts, webcasts, webinars and white papers
|
|
| Comprehensive documentation |
13 documentation sections, 6 in common
and 7 additional
|
7 documentation sections, 6 in common
and 1 additional
|
|
|
Community
|
No
|
||
|
Sync training
|
1 workshop
|
No
|
|
|
Async training
|
3 product use courses, all free
|
No
|
|
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
Direct or with any of its partners
|
|
| Marketplaces | AWS and Azure | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Free trial
|
7-day free trial
|
||
|
Demo
|
Yes
|
||
|
Open demo
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Pricing
|
Contact sales and marketplaces
|
||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
3 plans (essential, professional and
ultimate). None transparent
|
|
Minimum term
|
Annually
|
||
|
Minimum payment period
|
Annually
|
||
|
Minimum capabilities
|
ASPM, binary SAST, containers, CSPM, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and
secrets
|
Same plus: API
security testing, PTaaS, RE and SCR
|
API security testing and DAST
|
|
Minimum scope
|
1 author
|
150 targets and users
|
|
|
Pricing drivers
|
Targets and users
|
||
|
Minimum monthly payment
|
550 USD
|
||
|
Free implementation
|
No
|
||
|
Free support
|
No
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Invicti
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
No | |
|
Secure code review
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Pivoting
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Exploitation
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Manual reattacks
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Zero-day
vulnerabilities
|
None
|
Continuous zero-day vulnerability research
|
None
|
|
SLA
|
Availability and response | ||
|
Minimum availability
|
>=99.95% per minute LTM
|
>= 99.5% per month
|
|
|
After-sale guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
Accreditations
|
None
|
||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
Employee
|
|
Endpoint control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Channel control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements from 67 standards, 15 in common and 52
additional
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
15 standards, all in common
|
|
Detection method
|
Automated tools, AI and human intelligence
|
Automated tools
|
|
|
False positives
|
11.49 times better
|
18.07 times better
|
5% F0.5 score per quantity
|
|
False negatives
|
19.92 times better
|
57.28 times better
|
1% F2.0 score per severity
|
|
Remediation
|
5, 1 in common and 4 additional
|
Same, plus 1
|
1 in common
|
|
Outputs
|
5, 3 in common and 2
additional
|
Same, plus 2
|
7, 3 in common and 4 additional
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Invicti
|
|
ASPM
|
Yes
|
||
|
API
|
REST with JSON
|
||
|
IDE
|
Same, plus 1 functionality
|
No
|
|
|
CLI
|
Yes
|
||
|
CI/CD
|
Breaks the build
|
||
|
Vulnerability sources
|
4 sources
|
No information available
|
|
|
Threat model alignment
|
No
|
||
|
Priority criteria
|
CVSS v4.0
|
||
|
Custom prioritization
|
No | ||
|
Scanner origin
|
In-house
|
||
|
SCA
|
Yes, run-time SCA. No information
available
|
||
|
AI security
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Reachability
|
12 languages
|
No
|
|
|
Reachability type
|
Not applicable
|
||
|
SBOM
|
Yes. No information available
|
||
|
Malware detection
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
Autofix on components
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Containers
|
No
|
||
|
Source SAST
(languages)
|
No
|
||
|
Source SAST
(frameworks)
|
No
|
||
|
Custom rules
|
No
|
No
|
URL rewrite
|
|
IaC
|
No
|
||
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type of binary
|
Same, plus 2 types of binaries
|
No
|
|
DAST
|
7 attack surface types, 4 in common and
3 additional
|
5 attack surface types, 4 in common
and 1 additional
|
|
|
API security testing
|
No
|
4 types of APIs, all in common
|
4 types of APIs, all in common
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
4 languages and frameworks
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes |
No
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Secrets
|
Same, plus verify other attack vectors
and secrets exploitability
|
No
|
|
|
AI
|
3 functions, none in common
|
1 function | |
|
MCP
|
No
|
||
|
Open-source
|
Not applicable
|
No
|
|
|
Provisioning as code
|
No
|
||
|
Deployment
|
SaaS (multi-tenant) + on-premises
(single-tenant)
|
||
| Regions |
CA, EU, IE and US
|
||
|
Status
|
Yes
|
||
|
Incidents
|
9.8 per year
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Invicti
|
|
SCM
|
None
|
||
|
Binary repositories
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Ticketing
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional
|
14, 2 in common and 12 additional
|
|
|
ChatOps
|
None |
None
|
3 |
|
IDE
|
None
|
||
|
CI/CD
|
21, 9 in common and 12 additional
|
9, all in common
|
|
|
SCA
|
11
|
||
|
Container
|
10 | ||
|
SAST
|
21
|
||
|
DAST
|
Native and 10 integrations
|
||
|
IAST
|
None |
None
|
Native and 2 integrations
|
|
Cloud
|
None
|
||
|
CSPM
|
10 | ||
|
Secrets
|
None
|
||
|
Remediation
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Bug bounty
|
None
|
None
|
1
|
|
Vulnerability management
|
None
|
None
|
Native and 1 integration
|
|
Compliance
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
The latest update to this comparison was on Dec 15, 2025. The primary sources of information
were invicti.com and docs.invicti.com, which were supplemented by specialized
information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
Free trial
Search for vulnerabilities in your apps for free with Fluid Attacks' automated security testing! Start
your 21-day free trial and discover the
benefits of the Continuous
Hacking Essential plan. If you prefer the
Advanced plan, which includes the expertise of Fluid Attacks' hacking team, fill out this contact form.