No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Ixia BreakingPoint vs OWASP Zap comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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

Ixia BreakingPoint
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
31st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OWASP Zap
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
15th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
41
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 Ixia BreakingPoint is 0.7%, up from 0.2% 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
ProductMindshare (%)
OWASP Zap3.1%
Ixia BreakingPoint0.7%
Other96.2%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Prakarn Wungpichayssuk - PeerSpot reviewer
ManBusiness Directorager at CSG SOLUTION
Useful simulated attack database, high availability, but integration could improve
We are using Ixia BreakingPoint for security testing by generating traffic The most valuable feature of Ixia BreakingPoint is the ransomware and malware database for simulated attacks. The integration could improve in Ixia BreakingPoint. The vendor should provide a portal for webinars. I have…
NK
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible."
"BPS VE evaluation was used for testing LTE Network elements with a focus on user plane testing BPS VE along with its UI and new concepts to reduce the complexity of manual testing to a large extent."
"The most valuable feature is Layer 7 traffic generation such as Facebook, Netflix, WhatsApp."
"I like that we can test cloud applications."
"The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible."
"The most valuable feature of Ixia BreakingPoint is the ransomware and malware database for simulated attacks."
"What Ixia BreakingPoint brings to the end customer is the use case."
"The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use."
"It has improved my organization with faster security tests."
"Simple to use, good user interface."
"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."
"The product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."
"The pull request analysis is also very good."
"One valuable feature of OWASP Zap is that it is simple to use."
"The product has improved our application security engagement, helps with our in-house review so we sometimes don't need an external third-party tester, and once we get it from OWASP Zap, we have an idea of the inherent vulnerabilities in the application, which is a plus to save cost and improve our application accuracy practice."
"The community edition updates services regularly. They add new vulnerabilities into the scanning list."
 

Cons

"The solution originally was hard to configure; I'm not sure if they've updated this to make it simpler, but if not, it's something that could be streamlined."
"They should improve UI mode packages for the users."
"The quality of the traffic generation could be improved, to get closer to being accurate in what a real user would do."
"Currently BPS VE's REST API was just developed (some specific functionalities are implemented) and can be improved for better control over the tool using scripts, which help in test automation."
"The price could be better."
"The flash GUI has room for improvement."
"The quality of the traffic generation could be improved with Ixia BreakingPoint, i.e. to get closer to being accurate in what a real user will do."
"I would appreciate some preconfigured network neighborhoods, which are predefined settings for testing networks."
"It would be nice to have a solid SQL injection engine built into Zap."
"The product reporting could be improved."
"Zap could improve by providing better reports for security and recommendations for the vulnerabilities."
"ZAP's integration with cloud-based CICD pipelines could be better. The scan should run through the entire pipeline."
"There are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores."
"We're currently moving away from OWASP to PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional; it's more user-friendly with a better interface."
"Without any support, we are in a black hole sometimes."
"OWASP should work on reducing false positives by using AI and ML algorithms."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"or us, the pricing is somewhere around $12,000 a year. I'm unsure as to what new licenses now cost."
"There is no differentiation in licenses for Breaking Point. For one license, you will get all the features. There is no complexity in that."
"The price of the solution is expensive."
"The solution is expensive."
"We have a one year subscription license for $25,000 US Dollars."
"The price is high. We pay for the license monthly."
"OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate."
"The tool is open-source."
"It's free. It's good for us because we don't know what the extent of our use will be yet. It's good to start with something free and easy 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."
"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."
"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."
"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
6%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise21
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 ...
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.
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...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Corsa Technology
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
Find out what your peers are saying about Ixia BreakingPoint vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.