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

OWASP Zap vs Qualys Web Application Scanning comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 18, 2026

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

OWASP Zap
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
14th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Qualys Web Application Scan...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
11th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of OWASP Zap is 2.9%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualys Web Application Scanning is 1.9%, down from 2.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Qualys Web Application Scanning1.9%
OWASP Zap2.9%
Other95.2%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Q&A Highlights

MK
Software Test Engineer at a tech company with 501-1,000 employees
Jan 23, 2020
 

Featured Reviews

Amit Beniwal - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
AnkitSharma13 - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Officer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Web scanning needs improvement but offers good vulnerability detection
The downside of Qualys Web Application Scanning is that it cannot crawl automatically. If I provide an IP address and a login form, it does basic testing, but it doesn't go deep as IBM AppScan does. If Qualys Web Application Scanning could improve its crawling capability, it would be more user-friendly. Qualys Web Application Scanning does IP-level testing, requiring direct input of credentials, and can only scan a few pages to provide known generic vulnerabilities, which isn't as beneficial from my point of view. The Vulnerability Management also relies heavily on version numbers and will flag vulnerabilities based on the component version, but it doesn't check if a real fix exists, leading to flags on components that actually have workarounds available.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The pull request analysis is also very good."
"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 product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."
"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 ZAP scan and code crawler are valuable features."
"The HUD, Heads Up Display, is a good feature; it provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."
"Automatic updates and pull request analysis."
"​It has improved my organization with faster security tests.​"
"It works with many different products."
"Network scanner has good reporting, coverage was also good."
"Qualys Web Application Scanning is very stable and reliable."
"It combines both web application vulnerability management and internal vulnerability management on one platform and dashboard. Usually, you have to purchase separate tools."
"Qualys Web Application Scanning is user-friendly, easy to understand, easy to use, and easy to deploy."
"It is a cloud-based solution, so it is easy to scale."
"By using QualysGuard, we are able to finish external scans with assured results in half the time.​"
"​We have experienced quick customer support. They have a complete list of our previous issues along with our history, which makes it faster for them to solve issues.​"
 

Cons

"The documentation is lacking and out-of-date, it really needs more love."
"We're currently moving away from OWASP to PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional; it's more user-friendly with a better interface."
"The product reporting could be improved."
"For scalability, I would rate OWASP Zap between four to five out of ten."
"It would be beneficial to enhance the algorithm to provide better summaries of automatic scanning results."
"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."
"It needs more robust reporting tools that can be in an editable form."
"There isn't too much information about it online."
"The software’s pricing could be improved."
"Qualys Web Application Scanning is very complex to use, and its graphical interface is not very user-friendly."
"We have many websites. We don't force scanning on all of them at once because it's taking some time."
"We are researching open source software because Qualys needs to improve their reports and the documentation for the end-users in resolving scanned issues."
"There could be better management and faster scanning."
"I have dealt with Qualys's technical support, and any enhancements are challenging. I would rate them a five out of ten."
"Please add manual penetration testing features. Also I didn't like the license terms and the features were limited compared to other tools used for web applications."
"The solution needs to adjust its pricing. They should make it more affordable."
 

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'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."
"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."
"The tool is open-source."
"This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."
"This solution is open source and free."
"It is an expensive platform."
"Qualys WAS' pricing is competitive."
"There are different options available with respect to licensing."
"From my perspective, it is a budget-friendly option."
"The product has a very good licensing model."
"Pricing was reasonable and competitive. It was not too far above the other products."
"Try the free trial of the product to understand the basic working mechanisms.​"
"The product is expensive, at least initially, in comparison to other products in this category."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise22
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise27
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Qualys Web Application Scanning?
Regarding pricing, I think for personal use, it is costly, but if organizations are ready to pay, then it is fine as they are using it.
What needs improvement with Qualys Web Application Scanning?
The downside of Qualys Web Application Scanning is that it cannot crawl automatically. If I provide an IP address and a login form, it does basic testing, but it doesn't go deep as IBM AppScan does...
What is your primary use case for Qualys Web Application Scanning?
I use Qualys Web Application Scanning, and we are using Vulnerability Management. By Vulnerability Management, I mean not TotalCloud; they have some on-premises solutions also. Patch Management and...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Qualys WAS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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
BskyB, Cartagena, ClearPoint Learning Systems, Connect Group, du, Fortrex Technologies, HBOR, HDI, Highlights for Children, The Lithuanian State Enterprise Centre of Registers, City of Miami Beach, Microsoft, MidlandHR, MSCI Inc., Northern Arizona University, Ofgem, Olympus Europa, PhoneFactor, RTL Nederland, ThousandEyes, VGZ Organisatie B.V.
Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. Qualys Web Application Scanning and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.