Acunetix API Security Testing vs Mend API Security: Side-by-Side Comparison (2026)

Acunetix API Security Testing

Development teams and AppSec programs managing REST, SOAP, and GraphQL APIs across multiple environments should pick Acunetix API Security Testing for its ability to discover hidden and undocumented endpoints that standard scanners miss, then validate them at scale through continuous automated scanning integrated into CI/CD pipelines. The tool's IAST sensor delivers server-side context during testing, which matters when you need to confirm whether a detected vulnerability actually executes or stays theoretical. This is less valuable for organizations still building API inventory or those needing manual penetration testing depth; Acunetix assumes you know what you're protecting and want to run it fast and often.

Mend API Security

Mid-market and enterprise development teams shipping APIs at scale should pick Mend API Security for its reachability analysis, which actually deprioritizes noise by showing you which vulnerabilities in your dependencies can be exploited through your API surface. The platform covers SAST, DAST, and SCA in one workflow with repository integration that runs in CI/CD without asking developers to context-switch, and the NIST Supply Chain Risk Management coverage reflects a vendor that understands open source composition matters more than marketing does. Skip this if your primary need is runtime API threat detection; Mend focuses on finding and fixing flaws earlier in the lifecycle, not blocking malicious requests in production.