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

OWASP Zap vs Polaris Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (15th)
Polaris Platform
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
3.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (14th), Static Code Analysis (12th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OWASP Zap is designed for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and holds a mindshare of 3.1%, down 5.1% compared to last year.
Polaris Platform, on the other hand, focuses on Software Composition Analysis (SCA), holds 1.6% mindshare, down 1.8% since last year.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OWASP Zap3.1%
SonarQube15.3%
Checkmarx One9.7%
Other71.9%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Polaris Platform1.6%
Snyk10.9%
Black Duck SCA9.9%
Other77.6%
Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
 

Featured Reviews

NK
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.
Alina-Eugenia Negulescu - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Procurement and Vendor Manger at twoday
Company consistently identifies security vulnerabilities with current solution but considers moving to a more developer-oriented tool due to complexity and costs
I wouldn't recommend it for small and medium customers, both in terms of the complexity and organizational processes and operational processes around it. I wouldn't go with Black Duck. It's not straightforward as it is with more developer-oriented and plug-and-play versions, so it requires a bit of knowledge and documentation to set it up. On the support part, in the past, we had some issues regarding the availability of the information on the knowledge portal. That was particularly due to the fact that when they integrated their knowledge hub or knowledge portal different kind of documentation, they have not adapted the text. There were circular references on the documentation that was misleading and confusing our people rather than helping them.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This solution is providing us with value and as long as it continues to do so, we'll continue to use it."
"OWASP Zap is straightforward to use. If someone doesn't have the budget for tools like Burp Suite, OWASP Zap is an excellent alternative."
"The scalability of this product is very good."
"It's great that we can use it with Portswigger Burp."
"It can be used effectively for internal auditing."
"The HUD is a good feature that provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."
"It has evolved over the years and recently in the last year they have added, HUD (Heads Up Display)."
"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."
"We have detected security vulnerabilities, which is absolutely one big benefit."
"We have detected security vulnerabilities, which is absolutely one big benefit."
 

Cons

"For scalability, I would rate OWASP Zap between four to five out of ten."
"It would be a great improvement if they could include a marketplace to add extra features to the tool."
"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."
"I would recommend this product to people although I think it is very difficult to deploy and we also have issues with maintenance."
"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."
"Without any support, we are in a black hole sometimes."
"Sometimes, we get some false positives."
"They stopped their support for a short period. They've recently started to come back again. In the early days, support was much better."
"I wouldn't recommend it for small and medium customers, both in terms of the complexity and organizational processes and operational processes around it."
"I wouldn't recommend it for small and medium customers, both in terms of the complexity and organizational processes and operational processes around it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution is open source and free."
"This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."
"OWASP Zap is free to use."
"The tool is open source."
"It is open source, and we can scan freely."
"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."
"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
894,830 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise22
No data available
 

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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Polaris Platform?
In my opinion, I think that it's a very good product for mature companies. It is quite expensive compared with competitors, with other providers of similar services of application security manageme...
What needs improvement with Polaris Platform?
I wouldn't recommend it for small and medium customers, both in terms of the complexity and organizational processes and operational processes around it. I wouldn't go with Black Duck. It's not str...
What is your primary use case for Polaris Platform?
The product teams use them under supervision from the security department. I'm not extremely familiar with the details on how the product teams are using it, but I think they have integrated it int...
 

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 SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: April 2026.
894,830 professionals have used our research since 2012.