Name: StackHawk
Brand: StackHawk
Rating: 4.6 (77 reviews)

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

- Vendor-authored comparisons position the platform as a CI/CD-native alternative to some legacy DAST tools; such materials are vendor-provided and should be evaluated alongside independent benchmarks and POC results. - Other vendors may offer more transparent entry pricing or packaged reporting that better aligns with compliance-driven programs. - Evidence of GitHub and CI pipeline integrations suggests an operational focus on embedding security checks into developer workflows.

Market share and adoption trends

Public data on market share was not identified in the sources reviewed. Signals from review platforms indicate a moderate adoption footprint relative to large legacy vendors. Public funding disclosures indicate continued vendor investment and growth efforts.

	StackHawk	Invicti	Detectify
Starting Price	Not clearly published on the official vendor site; marketplace listings indicate per-contributor pricing with minimums; third-party review snapshots list indicative starting prices — verify via vendor quote	Quote-based; vendor markets enterprise scanning and governance capabilities	Public package pricing available for some offerings (e.g., asset-based pricing for application/API scanning and surface monitoring)
Primary fit	Teams seeking CI/CD-integrated DAST and developer workflow integration with configuration-as-code	Programs requiring mature enterprise DAST features and packaged governance/reporting	External attack-surface and asset-based scanning for organizations needing discovery and monitoring
Key strength	Developer workflow integration and configuration-as-code; emphasis on API coverage	Enterprise breadth, packaged reports, and governance features	Transparent entry pricing for some packages and asset-focused monitoring
Key weakness	Reported dashboard and reporting limitations; setup complexity for authentication scripting; limited public pricing transparency	Pricing and packaging often require quotes; may be more security-team-led than developer-native	May not be as CI/CD pipeline–native as developer-oriented DAST solutions

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Vendor-authored comparisons position the platform as a CI/CD-native alternative to some legacy DAST tools; such materials are vendor-provided and should be evaluated alongside independent benchmarks and POC results.
Other vendors may offer more transparent entry pricing or packaged reporting that better aligns with compliance-driven programs.
Evidence of GitHub and CI pipeline integrations suggests an operational focus on embedding security checks into developer workflows.

Market share and adoption trends

	StackHawk	Invicti	Detectify
Starting Price	Not clearly published on the official vendor site; marketplace listings indicate per-contributor pricing with minimums; third-party review snapshots list indicative starting prices — verify via vendor quote	Quote-based; vendor markets enterprise scanning and governance capabilities	Public package pricing available for some offerings (e.g., asset-based pricing for application/API scanning and surface monitoring)
Primary fit	Teams seeking CI/CD-integrated DAST and developer workflow integration with configuration-as-code	Programs requiring mature enterprise DAST features and packaged governance/reporting	External attack-surface and asset-based scanning for organizations needing discovery and monitoring
Key strength	Developer workflow integration and configuration-as-code; emphasis on API coverage	Enterprise breadth, packaged reports, and governance features	Transparent entry pricing for some packages and asset-focused monitoring
Key weakness	Reported dashboard and reporting limitations; setup complexity for authentication scripting; limited public pricing transparency	Pricing and packaging often require quotes; may be more security-team-led than developer-native	May not be as CI/CD pipeline–native as developer-oriented DAST solutions