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

OWASP Zap vs Veracode comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 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)
12th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
41
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
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Container Security (14th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (2nd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of OWASP Zap is 2.5%, down from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 4.9%, down from 6.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Veracode4.9%
OWASP Zap2.5%
Other92.6%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

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.
YS
Software Development Engineer II at Rocket Software
Monthly scans have provided baseline security but still miss critical vulnerabilities
Veracode can improve to stand in this market. They do not have to do much; they just need to improve their UI experience and add more documentation within the application rather than just creating documentation pages on different websites. They need to ensure their web application guides whoever uses it. Since whoever uses Veracode must be a technical person, they just need to guide them to the actual points. They can also improve their security capabilities by adding more filters to identify what vulnerabilities their application has. They need to improve their scanning engine to scan for more critical defects. Also, the integration part can be enhanced by adding features to integrate with a CLI, such as introducing a CLI version or a Jenkins plugin. If such features exist, they should show it as a pop-up, signaling that they have a new feature. Currently, it feels Veracode from two years ago is still the same, so that is something Veracode needs to improve. They can improve the security part. Some of the severe security issues were never caught by Veracode in the reports. In fact, I have never seen any high or critical severity issues pop up in my Veracode report. That is one thing they can improve on their scanning ability to catch high severity issues. Next is integration; Veracode does not provide any tools to integrate with Jenkins or CLI. I do not even know if there is any CLI for Veracode that I can use to automate in my pipeline. The last thing is the UI interface that they have, as it is a bit confusing. I remember we did not have the capability to handle authentications of our internal application. We had to write Selenium code using a Selenium IDE. To write a Selenium script for a Veracode scan, you have to download a Selenium IDE, record it, and then paste that file into Veracode. I can see that Selenium IDE is already decommissioned, so it is no longer used by anyone. Still, we have to use it because Veracode only supports that kind of file for Selenium to automate. They can add more ways to authenticate our application using normal JavaScript or Python or Shell script. I feel these are the four main points. They can document it more by adding tooltips into the application that explain why a parameter is required and what other options are available. For the same example with the Selenium script, they can add a link to their documentation that explains what other kinds of scripts can be written for authentication. I feel they can also make the UI more intuitive so that whoever uses it can guide themselves, as whoever uses Veracode is already a technical person.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The valuable features are that it's very simple to use and the user interface is very good, particularly for beginners so they can start the application easily."
"The OWASP's tool is free of cost, which gives it a great advantage, especially for smaller companies to make use of the tool and at the same time give a comprehensive report with great confidence to the client for helping them in their go-live decision."
"It can be used effectively for internal auditing."
"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."
"The most valuable feature is the spidering because, being a security person, it is very important for me to know each and every section of that application, so we cannot afford to miss any single web page or any single link on a particular website."
"The application scanning feature is the most valuable feature."
"The solution is very easy to use, the initial setup is straightforward, it is free due to the fact that it is open-source, the stability is very good, and the product has a strong community surrounding it to help with issues and troubleshooting."
"Fuzzer and Java APIs help a lot with our custom needs."
"Veracode offers various security features."
"I like the static scanning, and Veracode's interface is excellent. The dashboard is easy to navigate."
"Developer Sandboxes help move scanning earlier within the SDLC."
"Veracode Fix is a new feature that functions similarly to auto-remediation for low or medium flaw codes."
"Provides consistent evaluation and results without huge fluctuations in false positives or negatives."
"It changes the DevSecOps process because we find flaws much earlier in the development life cycle, and we also spot third-party software that we don't allow on developers' machines."
"We used it for performing security checks. We have many Java applications and Android applications. Essentially it was used for checking the security validations for compliance purposes."
"The one thing we really liked about Veracode when we got it was the consultation calls; that our developers are able to schedule them on their own, instead of going to a "gatekeeper." They upload their code, they have questions, they schedule it, they speak with someone on the other side who is an expert, they can speak developer-to-developers."
 

Cons

"I prefer Burp Suite to SWASP Zap because of the extensive coverage it offers."
"The product should allow users to customize the report based on their needs."
"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."
"For scalability, I would rate OWASP Zap between four to five out of ten."
"Sometimes, we get some false positives."
"There isn't too much information about it online."
"The computers perform somewhat slowly when loading a large number of queries into memory."
"If there was an easier to understand exactly what has been checked and what has not been checked, it would make this solution better. We have to trust that it has checked all known vulnerabilities but it's a bit hard to see after the scanning."
"To be able to upload source codes without being compiled. That’s one feature that drives us to see other sources."
"Veracode Static Analysis lacks penetration testing, so that's a concern. The tool is also unable to scan when it's a C or C++ model, so that's another area for improvement."
"Veracode can be improved in terms of software composition analysis and related vulnerabilities."
"Because our application is large, it takes a long time to upload and scan."
"I think for us the biggest improvement would be to have an indicator when there's something wrong with a scan."
"It's very expensive for a small organization."
"The technical support service has room for improvement."
"The sandbox could use some improvement; when creating a sandbox, it requires us to put the application name in twice, which seems unnecessary."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution is open source and free."
"The tool is open-source."
"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."
"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."
"The tool is open source."
"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."
"It is open source, and we can scan freely."
"OWASP Zap is free to use."
"Users in some forums mentioned that pricing for this solution can be quite high."
"Licensing cost is on a yearly basis and there are no additional costs, the pricing is straightforward."
"We pay based on the number of developers working on a particular project."
"I know that Veracode is a semi-pricey solution. If you are serious about security, I would recommend that you use an open-source option to learn how the scanning process works and then look into Veracode if you want to really step up your game and have an all-in-one solution."
"The pricing is fair. You get a lot out of the product."
"It can be expensive to do this, so I would just make sure that you're getting the proper number of licenses. Do your analysis. Make sure you know exactly what it is you need, going in."
"The pricing is a little on the high side but since we combine our product into one suite, it is easy to do and works well for us."
"Veracode's price is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
University
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Computer Software 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 Business70
Midsize Enterprise46
Large Enterprise114
 

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...
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 is the biggest difference between Veracode and Checkmarx?
According to my experience of using both the tools in different organizations Veracode is a Cloud-native, managed AppSec platform with strong focus on ease of use, it is SaaS delivery, and provide...
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.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

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
Manhattan Associates, Azalea Health, Sabre, QAD, Floor & Decor, Prophecy International, SchoolCNXT, Keap, Rekner, Cox Automotive, Automation Anywhere, State of Missouri and others.
Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.