Contrast Security Assess vs OWASP Zap comparison

Contrast Security and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Contrast Security is ranked #27 with an average rating of 8.0, while OWASP is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0. Contrast Security holds a 0.6% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 4.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Contrast Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OWASP users who would recommend it.

Contrast Security Assess

Read 11 Contrast Security Assess reviews

1,313 Views
722 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

7,876 Views
7,167 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

OWASP Zap and Contrast Security Assess compete in the application security testing category. Contrast Security Assess has the upper hand due to its comprehensive real-time threat detection capabilities, which many users find justifies its higher cost.

Features: OWASP Zap is recognized for its effective vulnerability scanning, strong community support, and cost-effectiveness. It enables users to identify security loopholes efficiently. Contrast Security Assess integrates seamlessly into existing development workflows, offers continuous security assessments, and provides valuable real-time security insights, making it a popular choice for maintaining robust security measures.

Room for Improvement: Users suggest OWASP Zap could enhance its reporting features, offer better user guidance, and streamline the overall user experience. Contrast Security Assess, while functional, could reduce the complexity of some advanced features, modify its onboarding process, and improve initial user training to help new users navigate its capabilities more easily.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OWASP Zap users find deployment straightforward, supported by extensive community resources and documentation, though its support services are limited. Contrast Security Assess requires a more complex deployment but benefits from dedicated and responsive customer support, providing comprehensive assistance throughout the process.

Pricing and ROI: OWASP Zap is often considered a budget-friendly option due to its no-cost setup. Contrast Security Assess involves higher setup costs but offers a significant return on investment through continuous and proactive security monitoring, which users find valuable in maintaining a strong security stance.

To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. OWASP Zap Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. OWASP Zap

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 869,785 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Contrast Security Assess

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

27th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (26th)

OWASP Zap

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

11th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 0.6%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 4.5%, up from 4.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OWASP Zap	4.5%
Contrast Security Assess	0.6%
Other	94.9%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Mustufa Bhavnagarwala

CyberRisk Solution Advisor at Deloitte

A stable solution that provides lots of details on web-based vulnerabilities and source code reviews

Technical support for the solution should be faster. We have to further analyze what kind of CVEs are in the reported libraries and what part of the code is affected. That analysis can be added to the report that Contrast Security Assess gives. Further analysis should be done of the third-party libraries report that it gives. The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities. The onboarding or the setup of Contrast Security Assess can get a little easier.

Read full review

Amit Beniwal

Project Manager at Al Hassan LLC

Simplifies vulnerability discovery and has high quality support

There are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores. Sometimes, a vulnerability initially categorized as high severity may be reduced to medium or low over time after security patches are applied. This alignment with the present severity score and CVSS score could be improved.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities."

"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."

"We use the Contrast OSS feature that allows us to look at third-party, open-source software libraries, because it has a cool interface where you can look at all the different libraries. It has some really cool additional features where it gives us how many instances in which something has been used... It tells us it has been used 10 times out of 20 workloads, for example. Then we know for sure that OSS is being used."

"This has changed the way that developers are looking at usage of third-party libraries, upfront. It's changing our model of development and our culture of development to ensure that there is more thought being put into the usage of third-party libraries."

"No other tool does the runtime scanning like Contrast does. Other static analysis tools do static scanning, but Contrast is runtime analysis, when the routes are exercised. That's when the scan happens. This is a tool that has a very unique capability compared to other tools. That's what I like most about Contrast, that it's runtime."

"The accuracy of the solution in identifying vulnerabilities is better than any other product we've used, far and away. In our internal comparisons among different tools, Contrast consistently finds more impactful vulnerabilities, and also identifies vulnerabilities that are nearly guaranteed to be there, meaning that the chance of false positives is very low."

"Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs."

"It is a stable solution...Contrast Security Assess is one of the first players in this market, so they have experience and customers, especially abroad. Overall, it's a good product."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"It can be used effectively for internal auditing."

"The OWASP's tool is free of cost, which gives it a great advantage, especially for smaller companies to make use of the tool."

"The reporting is quite intuitive, which gives you a clear indication of what kind of vulnerability you have that you can drill down on to gather more information."

"The scalability of this product is very good."

"Automatic scanning is a valuable feature and very easy to use."

"The best feature is the Zap HUD (Heads Up Display) because the customers can use the website normally. If we scan websites with automatic scanning, and the website has a web application firewall, it's very difficult."

"The product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."

"The stability of the solution is very good."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side."

"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."

"Contrast's ability to support upgrades on the actual agents that get deployed is limited. Our environment is pretty much entirely Java. There are no updates associated with that. You have to actually download a new version of the .jar file and push that out to your servers where your app is hosted. That can be quite cumbersome from a change-management perspective."

"The solution needs to improve flexibility...The scalability of the product is a problem in the solution, especially from a commercial perspective."

"The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities."

"The out-of-the-box reporting could be improved. We need to write our own APIs to make the reporting more robust."

"I think there was activity underway to support the centralized configuration control. There are ways to do it, but I think they were productizing more of that."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"Zap could improve by providing better reports for security and recommendations for the vulnerabilities."

"They stopped their support for a short period. They've recently started to come back again. In the early days, support was much better."

"The product reporting could be improved."

"When comparing OWASP Zap and Burp Suite, the main difference besides pricing is that OWASP Zap has limitations with reporting levels and UI, which affects its reporting capabilities, whereas Burp Suite is already advancing with new AI features and scanning capabilities that OWASP Zap seems to be lacking."

"There's very little documentation that comes with OWASP Zap."

"I'd like to see a kind of feature where we can just track what our last vulnerability was and how it has improved or not. More reports that can have some kind of base-lining, I think that would be a good feature too. I'm not sure whether it can be achieved and implement but I think that would really help."

"The automated vulnerability assessments that the application performs needs to be simplified as well as diversified."

"OWASP should work on reducing false positives by using AI and ML algorithms. They should expand their capabilities for broader coverage of business logic flaws and complex issues."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"The solution is expensive."

"The solution’s pricing is high."

"OWASP Zap is free to use."

"It's free and open, currently under the Apache 2 license. If ZAP does what you need it to do, selling a free solution is a very easy."

"The tool is open source."

"This solution is open source and free."

"The tool is open-source."

"This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."

"It is open source, and we can scan freely."

More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

869,785 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

10%

University

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	21

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Contrast Security Assess?

When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Contrast Security Assess?

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Contrast Security Assess?

Contrast Security Assess is deployed on-cloud in our organization. I would recommend Contrast Security Assess to other users. It's a really good tool. It provides lots of details on web-based vulne...

See all answers

Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?

OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...

See all answers

What do you like most about OWASP Zap?

The best feature is the Zap HUD (Heads Up Display) because the customers can use the website normally. If we scan websites with automatic scanning, and the website has a web application firewall, i...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OWASP Zap?

OWASP might be cost-effective, however, people prefer to use the free edition available as open source.

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 21% of the time

Seeker Interactive vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 14% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 10% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 9% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OWASP Zap

Compared 18% of the time

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 14% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap

Compared 10% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

October 2025

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

September 2025

Download OWASP Zap product report

Also Known As

Contrast Assess

No data available

Overview

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Contrast Security

OWASP Zap is a free and open-source web application security scanner.

The solution helps developers identify vulnerabilities in their web applications by actively scanning for common security issues.

With its user-friendly interface and powerful features, Zap is a popular choice among developers for ensuring the security of their web applications.

OWASP

Sample Customers

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

1. Google 2. Microsoft 3. IBM 4. Amazon 5. Facebook 6. Twitter 7. LinkedIn 8. Netflix 9. Adobe 10. PayPal 11. Salesforce 12. Cisco 13. Oracle 14. Intel 15. HP 16. Dell 17. VMware 18. Symantec 19. McAfee 20. Citrix 21. Red Hat 22. Juniper Networks 23. SAP 24. Accenture 25. Deloitte 26. Ernst & Young 27. PwC 28. KPMG 29. Capgemini 30. Infosys 31. Wipro 32. TCS

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. OWASP Zap

September 2025

Free Report: Contrast Security Assess vs. OWASP Zap

Find out what your peers are saying about Contrast Security Assess vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

869,785 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Contrast Security Assess vs. OWASP Zap report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.