HCL AppScan vs OWASP Zap comparison

HCLSoftware and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. HCLSoftware is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.3, while OWASP is ranked #15 with an average rating of 8.0. HCLSoftware holds a 2.6% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 3.1% mindshare. Additionally, 84% of HCLSoftware users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OWASP users who would recommend it.

HCL AppScan

Read 44 HCL AppScan reviews

6,267 Views
4,512 Comparison Views

84% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

8,361 Views
7,692 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

HCL AppScan

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

HCL AppScan and OWASP Zap are prominent competitors in the security testing landscape. HCL AppScan holds an advantage in terms of support and deployment, whereas OWASP Zap stands out for its cost-effectiveness and feature set.

Features: HCL AppScan provides comprehensive security testing with robust automation and a vast vulnerability database, making it suitable for complex environments. It also supports extensive reporting capabilities. OWASP Zap offers essential security testing features focused on user-friendliness and dynamic analysis tools, promoting accessibility and flexibility for smaller teams.

Room for Improvement: HCL AppScan could enhance its tool integration capabilities and improve the depth of its reporting features. Additionally, users suggest better support for continuous integration processes. OWASP Zap could improve in scalability and the depth of its vulnerability analysis. Enhancing its user interface and providing more detailed documentation are also areas for OWASP Zap to focus on.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: HCL AppScan is known for quick deployment and reliable customer service, fitting enterprise environments well. The enterprise-grade support ensures businesses can integrate it smoothly into existing systems. OWASP Zap, on the other hand, is appreciated for its ease of initial setup, suitable for smaller teams, though customer support is more limited compared to HCL AppScan.

Pricing and ROI: HCL AppScan users note a high initial setup cost but recognize the ROI provided through extensive features and security insights. OWASP Zap offers a free open-source model, delivering significant ROI for budget-conscious teams thanks to its cost-effective nature without additional expenses, making it a popular choice for those with limited budgets.

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

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan vs. OWASP Zap

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 893,438 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

HCL AppScan

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

16th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

5.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (19th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (6th)

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

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of HCL AppScan is 2.6%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 3.1%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OWASP Zap	3.1%
HCL AppScan	2.6%
Other	94.3%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Ravi Khanchandani

Founder Director at Techsa Services

Has improved identification of encryption and authentication issues across cloud and on-prem applications

During the learning curve of onboarding HCL AppScan, we learned that HCL has altered the portfolio and now offers HCL AppScan 360, which has a much better look and feel with an improved user interface. However, there is one feature called SCA, which stands for Software Composition Analysis, that could be improved. When I'm doing an application scan, HCL AppScan has the ability to generate information about what components are in use. For example, if I'm scanning a web application, it shows me the various components being used. It tells me whether I have Java libraries, .NET frameworks, or other log management libraries such as Log4j, and what versions of those specific components are present. I would like to see more detailed reports from the tool. Currently, you can find out the components belonging to a specific software, but if detailed reporting became available, you would be in a better position to identify vulnerabilities. For instance, I could identify that I had the Log4j vulnerability and know that I need to fix my application accordingly. If they add the features I'm describing, I would consider giving them a higher rating. However, I've only been experienced with the product for three months.

Read full review

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

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"IBM AppScan has made our work easy, as we can do four to five scans of websites at a time, which saves time when it comes to vulnerability."

"HCL AppScan has helped us improve our security posture, as we've been able to identify quite a few issues."

"The solution offers services in a few specific development languages."

"The HCL AppScan turnaround time for Burp Suite or any new feature request is pretty good, and that is why we are sticking with the HCL."

"From the point of view of quality, very excellent quality, it's above all the tools that I have worked with."

"It highlights, with several grades of severity, the types of vulnerabilities, so we can focus on the most severe security vulnerabilities in the code."

"We catch them, we fix them, and we can offer a higher quality product to our clients."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is Postman."

More HCL AppScan pros

"Automatic scanning is a valuable feature and very easy to use."

"The stability of the solution is very good."

"OWASP is the best."

"This solution has improved my organization because it has made us feel safer doing frequent deployments for web applications."

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

"The product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."

"The product helps users to scan and fix vulnerabilities in the pipeline."

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

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"They could add a software component analysis tool."

"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."

"The solution often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."

"Improvement can be done as per customer requirements."

"This product lacks in many areas, and so we are looking at other options."

"The dashboard, for AppScan or the Fortified fast tool, which we use needs to be improved."

"In future releases, I would like to see more aggressive reports. I would also like to see less false positives."

"The dashboard, for AppScan or the Fortified fast tool, which we use needs to be improved."

More HCL AppScan cons

"The documentation is lacking and out-of-date, it really needs more love."

"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."

"OWASP Zap needs to extend to mobile application testing."

"We get too many false positives and that should definitely be improved."

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

"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."

"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 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."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is cheap."

"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."

"AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."

"I rate the product's price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high. HCL AppScan is an expensive tool."

"The solution is moderately priced."

"HCL AppScan is expensive."

"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."

"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."

More HCL AppScan pricing and cost advice

"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 solution’s pricing is high."

"OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate."

"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."

"This solution is open source and free."

"It is open source, and we can scan freely."

"OWASP Zap is free to use."

"The tool is open source."

More OWASP Zap 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

893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

11%

University

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	14
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	31

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	22

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about HCL AppScan?

The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase.

See all answers

What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?

I'm currently working with BigFix and HCL AppScan. At least three people in my company are using HCL AppScan. Since we are a reseller, we run it in both lab environments and live production applica...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with OWASP Zap?

See all answers

Comparisons

Veracode vs HCL AppScan

Compared 8% of the time

Checkmarx One vs HCL AppScan

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube vs HCL AppScan

Compared 7% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs HCL AppScan

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs HCL AppScan

Compared 3% of the time

More HCL AppScan Competitors

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 11% of the time

SonarQube vs OWASP Zap

Compared 10% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs OWASP Zap

Compared 3% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan

May 2026

Download HCL AppScan product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

April 2026

Download OWASP Zap product report

Also Known As

IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan

No data available

Overview

HCL AppScan offers quick vulnerability detection with effective SDLC integration and is known for its user-friendly interface and seamless security integration.

HCL AppScan provides dynamic and static scanning to identify vulnerabilities like XSS and SQL injection. It integrates well into CI/CD pipelines, supports multiple languages, and offers web and dynamic scanning, helping businesses ensure security across development lifecycles. Users benefit from API coverage, Postman integration, and its ability to function in cloud and on-premise environments, facilitating a shift from DevOps to DevSecOps practices.

What features define HCL AppScan?

User-friendly interface: Simplifies navigation and usage.
Vulnerability detection: Quickly identifies issues like XSS and SQL injection.
Integration with SDLC: Seamlessly blends with development processes.
Dynamic scanning: Offers comprehensive security evaluations.
Multiple language support: Supports diverse programming environments.

What benefits should users consider?

Scalability: Adapts to growing needs and projects.
Low false-positive rates: Delivers accurate and reliable results.
Detailed reporting: Provides comprehensive vulnerability insights.
Effective integration: Enhances CI/CD pipeline security.

HCL AppScan is leveraged in sectors requiring rigorous security checks, such as finance and healthcare, where it conducts comprehensive scans and offers insights into potential vulnerabilities. Its robust scanning capabilities aid companies in maintaining compliance and security standards.

HCLSoftware

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

Sample Customers

Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT

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

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan vs. OWASP Zap

April 2026

Free Report: HCL AppScan vs. OWASP Zap

Find out what your peers are saying about HCL AppScan vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our HCL AppScan vs. OWASP Zap report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.