HCL AppScan vs OWASP Zap comparison

HCLSoftware and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. HCLSoftware is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.3, while OWASP is ranked #15 with an average rating of 8.0. HCLSoftware holds a 2.6% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 3.1% mindshare. Additionally, 84% of HCLSoftware users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OWASP users who would recommend it.

HCL AppScan

Read 44 HCL AppScan reviews

6,267 Views
4,512 Comparison Views

84% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

8,361 Views
7,692 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

HCL AppScan

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

HCL AppScan and OWASP Zap are prominent competitors in the security testing landscape. HCL AppScan holds an advantage in terms of support and deployment, whereas OWASP Zap stands out for its cost-effectiveness and feature set.

Features: HCL AppScan provides comprehensive security testing with robust automation and a vast vulnerability database, making it suitable for complex environments. It also supports extensive reporting capabilities. OWASP Zap offers essential security testing features focused on user-friendliness and dynamic analysis tools, promoting accessibility and flexibility for smaller teams.

Room for Improvement: HCL AppScan could enhance its tool integration capabilities and improve the depth of its reporting features. Additionally, users suggest better support for continuous integration processes. OWASP Zap could improve in scalability and the depth of its vulnerability analysis. Enhancing its user interface and providing more detailed documentation are also areas for OWASP Zap to focus on.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: HCL AppScan is known for quick deployment and reliable customer service, fitting enterprise environments well. The enterprise-grade support ensures businesses can integrate it smoothly into existing systems. OWASP Zap, on the other hand, is appreciated for its ease of initial setup, suitable for smaller teams, though customer support is more limited compared to HCL AppScan.

Pricing and ROI: HCL AppScan users note a high initial setup cost but recognize the ROI provided through extensive features and security insights. OWASP Zap offers a free open-source model, delivering significant ROI for budget-conscious teams thanks to its cost-effective nature without additional expenses, making it a popular choice for those with limited budgets.

To learn more, read our detailed HCL AppScan vs. OWASP Zap Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan vs. OWASP Zap

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 893,244 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

HCL AppScan

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

16th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

5.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (19th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (6th)

OWASP Zap

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

15th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of HCL AppScan is 2.6%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 3.1%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OWASP Zap	3.1%
HCL AppScan	2.6%
Other	94.3%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Ravi Khanchandani

Founder Director at Techsa Services

Has improved identification of encryption and authentication issues across cloud and on-prem applications

During the learning curve of onboarding HCL AppScan, we learned that HCL has altered the portfolio and now offers HCL AppScan 360, which has a much better look and feel with an improved user interface. However, there is one feature called SCA, which stands for Software Composition Analysis, that could be improved. When I'm doing an application scan, HCL AppScan has the ability to generate information about what components are in use. For example, if I'm scanning a web application, it shows me the various components being used. It tells me whether I have Java libraries, .NET frameworks, or other log management libraries such as Log4j, and what versions of those specific components are present. I would like to see more detailed reports from the tool. Currently, you can find out the components belonging to a specific software, but if detailed reporting became available, you would be in a better position to identify vulnerabilities. For instance, I could identify that I had the Log4j vulnerability and know that I need to fix my application accordingly. If they add the features I'm describing, I would consider giving them a higher rating. However, I've only been experienced with the product for three months.

Read full review

Nithin-K

Technical Analyst at Hexaware Technologies Limited

Open source testing tool empowers manual activities and has room to improve integration and reporting features

The improvement that has to be done for APIs focuses on manual activities where the feature exists, but it is not at the same level as what Burp Suite does with intercepting and tools such as Postman, so it needs improvement. There are limitations with authentication levels, particularly with form-based and cookie-based authentication. However, overall, we are satisfied with OWASP Zap as there are no major issues, and improving the scan engine could be beneficial. 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.

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

"The most valuable feature of the solution is Postman."

"AppScan's most valuable features include its ability to identify vulnerabilities accurately, provide detailed remediation steps, and the newly introduced AI-powered features that enhance its functionality further."

"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is scanning QR codes."

"The solution is easy to install. I would rate the product's setup between six to seven out of ten. The deployment time depends on the applications that need to be scanned. We have a development and operations team to take care of the product's maintenance."

"The product is useful, particularly in its sensitivity and scanning capabilities."

"It provides a better integration for our ecosystem."

"HCL AppScan has helped us improve our security posture, as we've been able to identify quite a few issues."

"The solution offers services in a few specific development languages."

More HCL AppScan pros

"We use the solution for security testing."

"It has improved my organization with faster security tests."

"The vulnerabilities that it finds, because the primary goal is to secure applications and websites."

"It updates repositories and libraries quickly."

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

"This solution is providing us with value and as long as it continues to do so, we'll continue to use it."

"The API is exceptional."

"It can be used effectively for internal auditing."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"They have to improve support."

"The tool should improve its output. Scanning is not a challenge anymore since there are many such tools available in the market. The product needs to focus on how its output is being used by end users. It should be also more user-friendly. One of the major challenges is in the tool's integration with applications that need to be scanned. Sometimes, the scanning is not proper."

"Improving usability could enhance the overall experience with AppScan. It would be beneficial to make the solution more user-friendly, ensuring that everyone can easily navigate and utilize its features."

"The solution's scalability can be a matter of concern because one license runs on one machine only."

"AppScan needs to improve its handling of false positives."

"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."

"It has crashed at times."

"One thing which I think can be improved is the CI/CD Integration"

More HCL AppScan cons

"The solution is unable to customize reports."

"The forced browse has been incorporated into the program and it is resource-intensive."

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

"Lacks resources where users can internally access a learning module from the tool."

"If there was an easier to understand exactly what has been checked and what has not been checked, it would make this solution better. We have to trust that it has checked all known vulnerabilities but it's a bit hard to see after the scanning."

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

"Deployment is somewhat complicated."

"The forced browse has been incorporated into the program and it is resource-intensive."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the product's pricing a nine out of ten. The product's pricing is expensive compared to the features that they offer."

"The price is very expensive."

"I rate the product's price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high. HCL AppScan is an expensive tool."

"AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."

"The tool was expensive."

"The product is moderately priced, though it's an investment due to extensive code analysis needs."

"HCL AppScan is expensive."

"The solution is cheap."

More HCL AppScan pricing and cost advice

"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."

"The tool is open-source."

"The tool is open source."

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

"The solution’s pricing is high."

"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."

"OWASP Zap is free to use."

"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."

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

893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

11%

University

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	31

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

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about HCL AppScan?

The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase.

See all answers

What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?

I'm currently working with BigFix and HCL AppScan. At least three people in my company are using HCL AppScan. Since we are a reseller, we run it in both lab environments and live production applica...

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 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

What needs improvement with OWASP Zap?

See all answers

Comparisons

Veracode vs HCL AppScan

Compared 8% of the time

Checkmarx One vs HCL AppScan

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube vs HCL AppScan

Compared 7% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs HCL AppScan

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs HCL AppScan

Compared 3% of the time

More HCL AppScan Competitors

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 12% of the time

SonarQube vs OWASP Zap

Compared 10% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs OWASP Zap

Compared 3% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan

May 2026

Download HCL AppScan product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

April 2026

Download OWASP Zap product report

Also Known As

IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan

No data available

Overview

HCL AppScan offers quick vulnerability detection with effective SDLC integration and is known for its user-friendly interface and seamless security integration.

HCL AppScan provides dynamic and static scanning to identify vulnerabilities like XSS and SQL injection. It integrates well into CI/CD pipelines, supports multiple languages, and offers web and dynamic scanning, helping businesses ensure security across development lifecycles. Users benefit from API coverage, Postman integration, and its ability to function in cloud and on-premise environments, facilitating a shift from DevOps to DevSecOps practices.

What features define HCL AppScan?

User-friendly interface: Simplifies navigation and usage.
Vulnerability detection: Quickly identifies issues like XSS and SQL injection.
Integration with SDLC: Seamlessly blends with development processes.
Dynamic scanning: Offers comprehensive security evaluations.
Multiple language support: Supports diverse programming environments.

What benefits should users consider?

Scalability: Adapts to growing needs and projects.
Low false-positive rates: Delivers accurate and reliable results.
Detailed reporting: Provides comprehensive vulnerability insights.
Effective integration: Enhances CI/CD pipeline security.

HCL AppScan is leveraged in sectors requiring rigorous security checks, such as finance and healthcare, where it conducts comprehensive scans and offers insights into potential vulnerabilities. Its robust scanning capabilities aid companies in maintaining compliance and security standards.

HCLSoftware

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

Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT

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

HCL AppScan vs. OWASP Zap

April 2026

Free Report: HCL AppScan vs. OWASP Zap

Find out what your peers are saying about HCL AppScan vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our HCL AppScan 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.