Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OWASP Zap vs SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 2025

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)
11th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SonarQube Cloud (formerly S...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of OWASP Zap is 5.1%, down from 5.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) is 6.6%, down from 6.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Amit Beniwal - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Archana Verma - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides valuable insights on code vulnerabilities and integrates seamlessly with CI/CD pipelines
I find SonarQube Cloud to be very user-friendly with an easy-to-use interface. It provides detailed code smell reports and insights on hotspots, which can later represent security vulnerabilities. It gives precise reports compared to Coverity and has a slightly lower number of false positives. It is integrated easily with the CI/CD pipeline, saving time and cost. It provides information on upcoming vulnerability details and loopholes that might turn into vulnerabilities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This solution has improved my organization because it has made us feel safer doing frequent deployments for web applications. If we have something really big, we might get some professional company in to help us but if we're releasing small products, we will check it ourselves with Zap. It makes it easier and safer."
"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 community edition updates services regularly. They add new vulnerabilities into the scanning list."
"OWASP is quite matured in identifying the vulnerabilities."
"The vulnerabilities that it finds, because the primary goal is to secure applications and websites."
"The HUD is a good feature that provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."
"​It has improved my organization with faster security tests.​"
"The product helps users to scan and fix vulnerabilities in the pipeline."
"The most valuable feature of SonarCloud is its overall performance."
"SonarCloud is overall a good tool for identifying code smells, bugs, and code duplication, but we've found that using Android Lint is more effective for our needs."
"The most valuable features of SonarCloud are the ability to discover vulnerabilities, security weak points, security hotspots, and all the feedback that comes into the feature branch. You can deploy the code with the security, you can eliminate the problem at the developer level rather than identifying the problem in the productions."
"I'm not implementing the solutions. However, I've talked to the people who deploy the tools, and they are happy with how easy setting up SonarCloud is."
"I find SonarQube Cloud very easy to use and simple to integrate initially."
"Its dashboard provides a unified view of various code quality metrics, including code duplication, unit test coverage, and security hotspots."
"The solution can be installed locally."
"Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service."
 

Cons

"The documentation is lacking and out-of-date, it really needs more love."
"Online documentation can be improved to utilize all features of ZAP and API methods to make use in automation."
"ZAP's integration with cloud-based CICD pipelines could be better. The scan should run through the entire pipeline."
"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 documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."
"I prefer Burp Suite to SWASP Zap because of the extensive coverage it offers."
"The product reporting could be improved."
"The technical support team must be proactive."
"SonarQube Cloud could improve its vulnerability detection compared to Veracode."
"It would be helpful if notifications could go out to an extra person."
"SonarCloud's UI needs enhancement."
"Reporting features are missing in SonarCloud."
"The solution needs to improve its customization and flexibility."
"The UI can be improved."
"The reports could improve by providing more information. We are not able to use the reports in our operation until they are improved. Additionally, if the vendor provided more customization capabilities it would be a benefit."
"I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."
"This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."
"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 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."
"This solution is open source and free."
"The solution’s pricing is high."
"It is open source, and we can scan freely."
"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."
"While not extremely cheap, it aligns well with market standards and offers good value."
"Previously, the pricing was 17,000 euros for five million lines analyzed. However, they now charge $15,000 per one million lines, significantly increasing the cost."
"The price of SonarCloud could be less expensive. We are using the community version and the price should be more reasonable."
"The price of SonarCloud is not expensive, it goes by the lines of code. 1 million lines per code are approximately 4,000 USD per year. If you need 2 million lines of code you would double the annual cost."
"The current pricing is quite cheap."
"I am using the free version of the solution."
"I rate the pricing a five out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 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...
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 do you like most about SonarCloud?
Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SonarCloud?
From what I understand, SonarQube Cloud is roughly equivalent in cost to Veracode, maybe a little cheaper.
What needs improvement with SonarCloud?
SonarQube Cloud could improve its vulnerability detection compared to Veracode. Additionally, it has fewer capabilities, which prompted us to use Veracode.
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

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
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.