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 7.5, while OWASP is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.0. HCLSoftware holds a 2.6% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 2.9% 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

6,863 Views
4,941 Comparison Views

84% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

8,774 Views
8,072 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

HCL AppScan

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

HCL AppScan and OWASP Zap compete in the web application security testing category. Though HCL AppScan offers advanced features and integrates well with development lifecycles, OWASP Zap stands out for its cost-effectiveness and flexibility.

Features: HCL AppScan features advanced scanning capabilities, integration into the software development lifecycle, and detects vulnerabilities like XSS and SQL injections with precision. It provides industry-specific templates and robust security-focused findings. OWASP Zap, an open-source tool, is widely accessible and known for its powerful spidering and user-friendly interface, ideal for beginners. It provides flexibility and community-driven enhancements.

Room for Improvement: HCL AppScan could reduce false positives, improve usability, and enhance customer support. Better container integration and central management for its static and dynamic scanning are also needed. OWASP Zap should focus on improving automation accuracy, enhancing reporting, and supporting diverse environments like mobile testing. Users suggest more robust updates and better documentation.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: HCL AppScan offers deployment flexibility, being available on public cloud, hybrid cloud, and on-premises. However, users often wish for more responsive technical support. OWASP Zap is primarily on-premises but available on public cloud through community setups. Its open-source nature means relying on community forums for support, which can delay quick resolutions.

Pricing and ROI: HCL AppScan is expensive but valued for its detailed reports and integration features, providing a strong long-term ROI by reducing vulnerabilities and costs. OWASP Zap's main advantage is being a free, open-source solution, making it popular among small to medium businesses and startups, offering extensive features without financial barriers.

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

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan vs. OWASP Zap

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 900,747 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 (21st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (6th)

OWASP Zap

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

14th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 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 2.9%, 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	2.9%
HCL AppScan	2.6%
Other	94.5%

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

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

"It's honestly one of the best products in the application security portfolio."

"For me, as a manager, it was the ease of use. Inserting security into the development process is not normally an easy project to do. The ability for the developer to actually use it and get results and focuses, that's what counted."

"The product has valuable features for static and dynamic testing."

"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."

"AppScan seems to be very good at detecting reflected XSS vulnerabilities."

"I prefer Appscan, as it much more user friendly, and it detects cross-site scripting and SQL injection issues much better than other tools in the market."

"The static scans are good, and the SaaS as well."

"It is an application for security assessment or scanning for static environments, and with all customers, it is performing well."

More HCL AppScan pros

"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."

"OWASP Zap is straightforward to use. If someone doesn't have the budget for tools like Burp Suite, OWASP Zap is an excellent alternative."

"The scalability of this product is very good."

"ZAP is easy to use. The automated scan is a powerful feature. You can simulate attacks with various parameters. ZAP integrates well with SonarQube."

"The community support that ZAP provides me, as an open source, provides me flexibility and is convenient to use."

"They offer free access to some other tools."

"It updates repositories and libraries quickly."

"OWASP is quite matured in identifying the vulnerabilities."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

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

"Many silly false positives are produced."

"I would love to see more containers. Many of the tools are great, they require an amount of configuration, setup and infrastructure. If most the applications were in a container, I think everything would be a little bit faster, because all our clients are now using containers."

"I think being able to search across more containers, especially some of the docker elements. We need a little tighter integration there. That's the only thing I can see at this point."

"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."

"We have experienced challenges when trying to integrate this solution with other products. When you compare it with the other SecOps products, the quality of the output is too low. It is not a new-age product. It is very outdated."

"The solution often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."

"The dashboard, for AppScan or the Fortified fast tool, which we use needs to be improved."

More HCL AppScan cons

"Without any support, we are in a black hole sometimes."

"The work that it does in the limited scope is good, but the scope is very limited in terms of the scanning features. The number of things it tests or finds is limited. They need to make it a more of a mainstream tool that people can use, and they can even think about having it on a proprietary basis. They need to increase the coverage of the scan and the results that it finds. That has always been Zap's limitation. Zap is a very good tool for a beginner, but once you start moving up the ladder where you want further details and you want your scan to show more in-depth results, Zap falls short because its coverage falls short. It does not have the capacity to do more."

"The product reporting could be improved."

"Right now, I can't give it off to a team and expect them to give me a report that I'm happy with."

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

"For scalability, I would rate OWASP Zap between four to five out of ten."

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

"Reporting format has no output, is cluttered and very long."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool was expensive."

"HCL AppScan is 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."

"Pricing was the main reason that we went ahead with this solution as they were the lowest in the market."

"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."

"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."

"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."

More HCL AppScan pricing and cost advice

"The tool is open-source."

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

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

"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."

"The tool is open source."

"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."

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

"The solution’s pricing is high."

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

900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

University

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	22

Questions from the Community

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

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HCL AppScan?

AppScan is considered more cost-effective than Veracode, although I have not updated the exact pricing details. Companies often choose based on budget constraints, with Veracode being on the higher...

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?

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 Postm...

See all answers

Comparisons

Veracode vs HCL AppScan

Compared 8% of the time

Checkmarx One vs HCL AppScan

Compared 7% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs HCL AppScan

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube vs HCL AppScan

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs HCL AppScan

Compared 3% of the time

More HCL AppScan Competitors

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap

Compared 11% of the time

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 10% of the time

SonarQube vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

Invicti vs OWASP Zap

Compared 4% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan

June 2026

Download HCL AppScan product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

June 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

June 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: June 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

900,747 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.