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

OWASP Zap vs Veracode comparison

 

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)
10th
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)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Container Security (8th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (3rd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of OWASP Zap is 3.5%, down from 4.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 5.0%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Veracode5.0%
OWASP Zap3.5%
Other91.5%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Prasant Pokarnaa - PeerSpot reviewer
Delivery Head - DevOps at Datamato Technologies
Effective vulnerability identification enhances security scans but AI-driven enhancements are needed
OWASP is only meant for two or three different types of scans. It is a tool which will scan the code for security for vulnerabilities We were able to convince the customers to really remove those rules when GitLab was able to show the results. Customers should be aware that GitLab is not just a…
reviewer2703864 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I consider OWASP Zap to be the most effective solution overall; being open source allows integration with other systems via OWASP Zap APIs."
"Simple to use, good user interface."
"It can be used effectively for internal auditing."
"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 vulnerabilities that it finds, because the primary goal is to secure applications and websites."
"The ZAP scan and code crawler are valuable features."
"Two features are valuable. The first one is that the scan gets completed really quickly, and the second one is that even though it searches in a limited scope, what it does in that limited scope is very good. When you use Zap for testing, you're only using it for specific aspects or you're only looking for certain things. It works very well in that limited scope."
"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."
"It has provided what we were looking for in such an application, meaning static application security testing functionality. That was what we were interested in."
"It provides security of different Shadow IT activities in our environment, especially around application development and website hosting."
"I appreciate Veracode's SAST and SCA features, which help to find open-source vulnerabilities. I'd estimate it's about 98% accurate, though some false positives occasionally exist. Our team has been using it for a long time."
"Being able to scan our applications and identify all codes and defects is an extremely valuable feature."
"Veracode allows us to easily summarize issues and provide quick, actionable insights."
"It pinpoints the errors. Its accuracy is very interesting. It also elaborates on flaws, meaning it provides you with details about what is valid or not and how something can be fixed."
"I like Veracode's API. You can put it into a simple bash script and run your own security testing from your MacBook in less than 15 minutes."
"The static scan is the feature that we use the most, as it gives us insight into our source code. We have it integrated with our continuous integration, continuous delivery system, so we can get insight quickly."
 

Cons

"Zap could improve by providing better reports for security and recommendations for the vulnerabilities."
"For scalability, I would rate OWASP Zap between four to five out of ten."
"Reporting format has no output, is cluttered and very long."
"There isn't too much information about it online."
"OWASP should work on reducing false positives by using AI and ML algorithms. They should expand their capabilities for broader coverage of business logic flaws and complex issues."
"The solution is somewhat unreliable because after we get the finding, we have to manually verify each of its findings to see whether it's a false positive or a true finding, and it takes time."
"OWASP should work on reducing false positives by using AI and ML algorithms."
"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."
"I would like to see these features: entering comments for internal tracking; entering a priority; reports that show the above."
"It could be improved with support for more programming languages, like SQL."
"The area with the most room for improvement is the speed and responsiveness of the query, as it is usually very slow."
"When Veracode updates the pool of tests and security checks, it could be a little more transparent about what it is releasing. It's not clear what it's adding. They do thousands of checks, and when they add more, there aren't many details about what the new tests are doing."
"We get some false positives with JavaScript languages like React, TypeScript, and Angular. The problem is rooted in the build process of JavaScript, not the code we are using. This is something we spend lots of time trying to resolve. When we point to a specific library and review that on the code, we can see it is a part of the build that isn't going into production. It's only a part of the build because JavaScript has a different build process."
"In my opinion, Veracode lacks significantly in most parts, including its UI, its reporting, ease of use, and the features that it provides."
"Their scanning engine is sometimes a little bit slow. They can improve the scan time."
"The only notable problem we have had is that when new versions of Swift have come out, we have found Veracode tends to be a bit behind in updates to support the new language changes."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"OWASP Zap is free to use."
"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 is open source, and we can scan freely."
"This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."
"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."
"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."
"OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate."
"The price of Veracode Static Analysis is expensive. There is an annual fee to use the solution and the company is upfront with the pricing model and fees."
"Veracode is one of the more expensive solutions in the market, but it is worth the expense because of the eLearning and the security consultations; everything is included in the license."
"I'm unfamiliar with the solution's pricing, but it must be worth the cost from a company perspective, as we have been using it for years and have no plans to move away from it."
"They just changed their pricing model two weeks ago. They went from a per-app license to a per-megabyte license. I know that the dynamic scan was $500 per app. Static analysis was about $4500 yearly. The license is only for the number of users, it doesn't matter what data you put in there. That was the old model. I do not know how the new model works."
"If you're licensing, and you're looking at licensing models, you might want to ask Veracode about their microservice, depending on the company. If you are a microservice architecture, I would suggest asking them about their microservice pricing. I would suggest that you evaluate that with your code and their other licensing model, which is like a lump sum in size of artifacts, and just make sure that you price that out with them, because there might be some tradeoffs that can be made in price."
"The pricing is really fair compared to a lot of other tools on the market."
"I have not examined Veracode's pricing in detail, but from an industry perspective, I see that there is a tendency toward Veracode, which suggests competitive pricing."
"It's too expensive for the European market. That is why, in a big bank with 400 applications, we are able to use it only for 10 of them. But the other solutions are also expensive, so it wasn't a differentiator."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
University
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise21
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise44
Large Enterprise115
 

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.
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.
 

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: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.