OWASP Zap vs Veracode comparison

Read 207 Veracode reviews

23,090 Views
13,161 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

Veracode and OWASP Zap compete in the application security testing market. Veracode seems to have the upper hand due to its seamless integration with development environments and comprehensive support services.

Features: Veracode offers a comprehensive suite for static code analysis, dynamic and manual scans, and IDE integrations through APIs and plugins. It features a low false positive rate, cloud scalability, and extensive language support. OWASP Zap provides functionalities like an intercepting proxy, fuzzing, scripting support, and benefits from a strong open-source community, although its integration capabilities into development environments aren't as seamless as Veracode.

Room for Improvement: Veracode users seek improvements in reducing false positives, enhancing the user interface, expanding language support, and speeding up scan times. There's also a desire for better API functionalities and reporting. OWASP Zap could improve reporting, documentation, and mobile testing support, along with better customization options and reducing false positives.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Veracode supports diverse deployment environments, including public and private clouds, offering versatile deployment options. Its customer support is generally rated well for responsiveness, though some report long response times. OWASP Zap is primarily on-premises, suitable for organizations with data hosting constraints. However, its support is community-driven and lacks structured support compared to Veracode's dedicated team.

Pricing and ROI: Veracode is considered a premium offering, with robust features and comprehensive support justifying its cost, though it may be prohibitive for smaller organizations. Its high-level security measures can enhance ROI over time. OWASP Zap is free and open-source, appealing to budget-conscious organizations or those new to security testing, although it may lack some advanced features, potentially impacting long-term ROI in security assurance and support.

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

OWASP Zap vs. Veracode

Download the complete report

Helped 893,221 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

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

Veracode

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

207

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (3rd), Container Security (10th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (2nd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of OWASP Zap is 3.1%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 4.9%, down from 9.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Veracode	4.9%
OWASP Zap	3.1%
Other	92.0%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

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

reviewer2703864

Head of Security Architecture at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees

Onboarding developers successfully while improving code security through IDE integration

Regarding room for improvement, we have some problems when onboarding new projects because the build process has to be done in a certain way, as Veracode analyzes the binaries and not the code by itself alone. If the process is not configured correctly, it doesn't work. That's one of the things that we are discussing with Veracode. Something positive that we've been able to do is submit formal feature requests to them, and they are working on them; they've already solved some of them. This encourages us to propose new ideas and improvements. Another improvement that we asked for this use case is to be able to configure how Veracode Fix proposes and fixes because sometimes it makes proposals using libraries that go against our architecture design made by the enterprise architecture team. For example, we want them to propose using another library, and that's something we already asked Veracode, and they are working on it. We want to specify when you see this kind of vulnerability, you can only propose these two options.

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

"They offer free access to some other tools."

"It's great that we can use it with Portswigger Burp."

"The solution is scalable."

"The community edition updates services regularly. They add new vulnerabilities into the scanning list."

"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."

"Automatic updates and pull request analysis."

"Fuzzer and Java APIs help a lot with our custom needs."

"The HUD is a good feature that provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."

More OWASP Zap pros

"The benefits are quick discovery and understanding of software vulnerabilities that we are putting in our own code. By discovering them quickly enough, we can triage them and determine the best ways to remediate them and prevent them from happening in the future."

"We like the fact that all the issues are identified and that Veracode provides sufficient information on how to resolve them."

"I would give Veracode a nine out of 10 because it scales incredibly well, they have very qualified people working there who are able to clearly articulate what the problems are when they are talking in a remediation or consultation call."

"I like Veracode's ease of integration with various cloud platforms and tools."

"There are quite a few features that are very reliable, like the newly launched Veracode Pipelines Scan, which is pretty awesome. It supports the synchronous pipeline pretty well. We been using it out of the Jira plugin, and that is fantastic."

"Scanning of .war and .jar is key for us."

"From the very relevant results and issues that were pinpointed by Veracode, I can say that our customer security was greatly enhanced by its use."

"There are really three solutions at the top of the industry ratings, and Veracode is the best, in my opinion."

More Veracode pros

Cons

"I would like to see a version of “repeater” within OWASP ZAP, a tool capable of sending from one to 1000 of the same requests, but with preselected modified fields, changing from a predetermined word list, or manually created."

"I'd like to see a kind of feature where we can just track what our last vulnerability was and how it has improved or not. More reports that can have some kind of base-lining, I think that would be a good feature too. I'm not sure whether it can be achieved and implement but I think that would really help."

"Zap could improve by providing better reports for security and recommendations for the vulnerabilities."

"While the solution can scale to a certain extent, it cannot scale a lot."

"The port scanner is a little too slow."

"OWASP should work on reducing false positives by using AI and ML algorithms."

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

"Zap is very good 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."

More OWASP Zap cons

"The user interface can sometimes be a little challenging to work with, and they seem to be changing their algorithm on what is an issue. I understand why they do it, but it sometimes causes more work on our end."

"I'd like to see an improved component of it work in a DevOps world, where the scanning speed does not impede progress along the AppSec pipeline."

"Veracode Static Analysis could improve the terminology. For example, I do not know what the sandbox scan does. The terminology and the way they have used it are quite confusing. They should have a process of capturing problems that users are having on their end."

"Their documentation is awful and their response time wasn't ideal."

"There should be more APIs, especially in SCA, to get some results or automate some things."

"We would like a way to mark entire modules as "safe." The lack of this feature hasn't stopped us previously, it just makes our task more tedious at times."

"The solution has issues with scanning. It tries to decode the binaries that we are trying to scan."

"For one or two particular applications, the dynamic code analysis can take too much time. Sometimes, it takes three days or more."

More Veracode cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"OWASP Zap is free to use."

"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."

"The solution’s pricing is high."

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

"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 tool is open source."

More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice

"We are still considering it at the enterprise level. It has a subscription-based model. We find its price a little high based on the features it provides."

"Without getting too specific, I'd say the average yearly cost is around $50,000. The costs include licensing and maintenance support."

"As compared to others, it is a costly solution. It is overpriced, and many organizations with a limited budget cannot afford it. That is why they are going for other tools, but those tools are not that effective. Veracode is better in terms of quality. If you want good service, you have to pay for it."

"Veracode is fairly priced."

"We're very comfortable with their model. We think they're a good value. We worked very closely with Veracode on understanding their license model, understanding what comprises the fee and what does not. With their assistance in design, we decomposed our application in a way where we are scanning a very significant amount of code without wasting their capacity and generating redundant reported issues. You scan in profiles, per se. And we work with them, in their offices, to design the most effective approach. So the advice I would have for customers is, you can get up and live fast, but work closely with Veracode to refine the method you use for scanning and the way you compile the applications. There's a concept called entry-point scanning, and that's probably not used well by the rest of their customers. We see our licensing as a good value because we leverage it heavily."

"Regarding licensing, pay very close attention to what applications you're going to need to do dynamic scanning for, versus static. Right now, the way the licensing is set up, if you don't have any static elements for a website, you can certainly avoid some costs by doing more dynamic licenses. You need to pay very close attention to that, because if you find out later that you have static code elements - like Java scripts, etc. - that you want to have scanned statically, having the two licenses bundled together will actually save you money."

"It is pricey. There is a lot of value in the product, but it is a costly tool."

"Licensing is pretty flexible. It's a little bit weird, it's by the size of the binary, which is a strange way to license a product. So far they've been pretty flexible about it."

More Veracode 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

893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

11%

University

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	69
Midsize Enterprise	45
Large Enterprise	114

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?

Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?

SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...

What do you like most about Veracode Static Analysis?

I like its integration with GitHub. I like using it from GitHub. I can use the GitHub URL and find out the vulnerabilities.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veracode Static Analysis?

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Veracode is that it is fairly moderate.

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap

Comparisons

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 12% of the time

SonarQube vs OWASP Zap

Compared 10% of the time

Compared 9% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap

Compared 7% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap

Compared 6% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

SonarQube vs Veracode

Compared 7% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Veracode

Compared 6% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Veracode

Compared 3% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs Veracode

Compared 3% of the time

Coverity Static vs Veracode

Compared 3% of the time

More Veracode Competitors

Product Reports

OWASP Zap

Download OWASP Zap product report

Download Veracode product report

Also Known As

No data available

Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect

Overview

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

Veracode is a leading provider of application security solutions, offering tools to identify, mitigate, and prevent vulnerabilities across the software development lifecycle. Its cloud-based platform integrates security into DevOps workflows, helping organizations ensure that their code remains secure and compliant with industry standards.

Veracode supports multiple application security testing types, including static analysis (SAST), dynamic analysis (DAST), software composition analysis (SCA), and manual penetration testing. These tools are designed to help developers detect vulnerabilities early in development while maintaining speed in deployment. Veracode also emphasizes scalability, offering features for enterprises that manage a large number of applications across different teams. Its robust reporting and analytics capabilities allow organizations to continuously monitor their security posture and track progress toward remediation.

What are the key features of Veracode?

Static Analysis (SAST) - Scans source code for vulnerabilities before deployment.
Dynamic Analysis (DAST) - Examines applications in a running state to detect flaws in real-time.
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) - Identifies risks in open-source libraries and third-party components.
Manual Penetration Testing - Offers expert analysis for more complex vulnerabilities.
Integrations with DevOps tools - Seamlessly integrates with CI/CD pipelines for automated security checks.

What benefits should users consider in Veracode reviews?

Early detection of vulnerabilities - Helps developers fix security issues early in the development process.
Scalability - Supports organizations with large-scale application portfolios.
Compliance support - Ensures applications meet various security standards and regulations.
Developer training - Provides tools for educating developers on secure coding practices.
Comprehensive reporting - Offers detailed reports that track remediation and risk trends.

Veracode is widely adopted in industries like finance, healthcare, and government, where compliance and security are critical. It helps these organizations maintain strict security standards while enabling rapid development through its integration with Agile and DevOps methodologies.

Veracode helps businesses secure their applications efficiently, ensuring they can deliver safe and compliant software at scale.

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

Manhattan Associates, Azalea Health, Sabre, QAD, Floor & Decor, Prophecy International, SchoolCNXT, Keap, Rekner, Cox Automotive, Automation Anywhere, State of Missouri and others.

OWASP Zap vs. Veracode