Not All ‘Pentests’ Are Actually Pentests
One of the main reasons why penetration testing prices differ so much is simple: not every offer you receive is for the same service, even if it is labelled as a pentest.
In many cases, the lowest-priced option is not a real penetration test, but an automated vulnerability scan. This means that instead of a security expert actively testing your system, a tool is used to scan for known issues and generate a report. While this can be useful as a basic check, it does not provide the same depth, context, or reliability as a full penetration test.
A real penetration test goes far beyond running automated tools. It involves experienced specialists who:
- Test authentication and access control logic.
- Validate whether identified vulnerabilities are real.
- Identify complex, context-based weaknesses.
- Simulate realistic attack scenarios.
As our Head of Information Security, Gabrielius Vinciunas, puts it, ‘An automated report is not a penetration test. The key difference is not the tool itself, but what happens after. Automated tools can scan and list potential issues, but they cannot fully understand how those issues could be exploited in your specific environment. Human testers interpret results, connect different findings, and uncover risks that tools alone cannot detect.’
This is why two pentest offers can look similar on paper but deliver completely different value in practice.
For example, in our project with Orion Securities, as one of the best cyber security companies, our team at Baltic Amadeus conducted a comprehensive penetration test covering front-end, back-end, APIs, and internal infrastructure. We also included OSINT analysis to assess external exposure.
This approach allowed us to identify not only technical vulnerabilities, but also risks related to access control, user privileges, and publicly available information that could be exploited in a real attack scenario.
What Actually Drives Penetration Testing Costs
When comparing penetration testing offers, the biggest differences usually come from three factors: who performs the test, what exactly is being tested, and how the testing is carried out.
Level of expertise behind the test
One of the biggest factors influencing the price is the level of expertise behind the test. To put things into perspective, the global penetration testing market was valued at USD 2.74 billion in 2025. Experienced penetration testers bring not only technical knowledge, but also the ability to think like an attacker, connect seemingly unrelated issues, and validate real exploitability that is not immediately visible.
As Vinciunas explains:
‘You’re not paying for a tool. You’re paying for the experience behind it. There are not that many high-level security specialists, and building that expertise takes time. It requires continuous learning, practice, and investment. That is also one of the reasons why high-quality penetration testing is not cheap.’
At Baltic Amadeus, penetration testing is carried out by experienced cyber security professionals who have worked with complex, regulated environments such as finance, government, and telecom, where accuracy and reliability are critical.
Scope and complexity of the system
Another key factor is the scope of what is being tested.
‘The scope of the system has a huge impact on the effort required. Assessing a simple web application is relatively simple; the attack surface is smaller, and vulnerabilities are often isolated. In contrast, modern platforms composed of hundreds of API endpoints and interconnected subsystems introduce a very different risk profile. The challenge shifts from identifying individual flaws to understanding how weaknesses propagate and interact across components. In these environments, real-world impact typically emerges from chaining issues, such as leveraging a minor API misconfiguration alongside weak access controls to achieve unauthorised access or broader system compromise,’ says our CISO.
A complex ecosystem includes applications, APIs, integrations, and infrastructure components. The more interconnected the system, the more time and expertise is required to properly evaluate it.
For example, a basic WordPress site may require a relatively limited assessment, while a banking platform with multiple integrations, user roles, and security layers demands a much deeper and more structured approach.
Human effort vs automation
Automation plays an important role in modern security testing, but it cannot replace human expertise. Automated tools are efficient at identifying known issues, but they lack the ability to fully understand context.
A comprehensive penetration test involves manual work such as:
- Validating vulnerabilities to remove false positives.
- Exploring edge cases.
- Chaining vulnerabilities across systems.
- Simulating realistic attack paths.
For example, in a project with a specialised Lithuanian bank, Baltic Amadeus conducted both authorised and unauthorised penetration testing across the client’s infrastructure.
This type of engagement goes far beyond automated scanning, as it requires coordinating multiple testing approaches, analysing how different systems interact, and validating findings in real-world scenarios.
The amount of human effort required can also affect the size of the team involved. Smaller or simpler projects may be handled by a single specialist, while more complex environments often require a team of two or three experts with different skill sets.
‘The more people and expertise involved, the higher the cost, but also the depth of the results,’ our CISO notes.
The Cost of a Penetration Test in 2026
A typical penetration testing engagement includes several key stages and can cost roughly from €4,000 to €25,000. It starts with information gathering, where specialists analyse the system architecture, identify entry points, and map how different components interact. This is followed by the testing phase, where both automated tools and manual techniques are used to identify vulnerabilities and assess how they could be exploited in real conditions.
In practice, this stage often takes the most time, as it involves identifying issues, validating them, and exploring how they can be chained together. As highlighted by Vinciunas:
‘The most valuable part of penetration testing is not finding a vulnerability but understanding how it can actually be used in a real attack scenario.’
The work continues with analysis and reporting. This is where findings are prioritised based on real risk, false positives are eliminated, and clear recommendations are prepared. The goal is not just to highlight what is wrong, but to explain what matters most and how to fix it.
In Baltic Amadeus projects, this often includes step-by-step remediation guidance and, when needed, discussion of results with the client’s team to ensure that findings are clearly understood and actionable.
As a result, what clients receive is not just a report, but a structured view of their security posture and practical guidance on how to improve it. This is also where the difference between a basic scan and a full penetration test becomes most visible.
What You Lose When Choosing the Cheapest Option
Choosing the lowest-priced penetration testing option may seem like a cost-saving decision, but in practice, it often leads to gaps in security that remain unnoticed.
Vulnerabilities are not theoretical risks. According to Verizon’s Data Breach Investigations Report, attacks exploiting vulnerabilities for initial access have increased by 34%, highlighting how often attackers rely on existing security gaps. At the same time, 30% of breaches were linked to third-party involvement, showing how interconnected systems increase exposure and 44% of breaches involved ransomware, marking a continued rise in financially motivated attacks.
Despite this growing threat landscape, not all vulnerabilities are addressed effectively. While 54% of organisations fully remediate perimeter-device vulnerabilities, nearly half remain unresolved, leaving significant room for exploitation. This is often where lower-quality testing falls short, identifying issues without providing the clarity or depth needed to act on them.
The real cost, then, is not the price of the test itself, but the potential impact of what was missed.
Final Thoughts: How to Choose the Right Penetration Testing Vendor
Choosing a penetration testing vendor should not be based on price alone. The real question is what kind of insight and protection you will receive in return.
When evaluating a penetration testing vendor, consider:
- Proven hands-on experience, not just certifications.
- Clearly defined scope and testing depth.
- Inclusion of manual testing.
- Transparent methodology and deliverables.
- Actionable recommendations and post-test support.
As our CISO, Gabrielius Vinciunas, puts it, ‘Choosing a penetration tester is not just about checking the credentials and certifications, but making sure whether the person can actually demonstrate practical knowledge.’
As the top cyber security company, at Baltic Amadeus, penetration testing is approached as a practical, risk-focused process. In the end, the difference between vendors is not just in price, but in how well they help you reduce real-world risk.
