OWASP Zap vs Synopsys API Security Testing [EOL] comparison

OWASP and Black Duck are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. OWASP is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0, while Black Duck is ranked #46. OWASP holds a 4.6% mindshare in SAST, compared to Black Duck’s 0.2% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of OWASP users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Black Duck users who would recommend it.

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

8,461 Views
7,700 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Synopsys API Security Testi...

Read 1 Synopsys API Security Testing [EOL] review

346 Views
249 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Synopsys API Security Testi...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OWASP Zap and Synopsys API Security Testing [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST).

To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: August 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

August 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 867,370 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)

11th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Synopsys API Security Testi...

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

46th

Average Rating

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of OWASP Zap is 4.6%, up from 4.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Synopsys API Security Testing [EOL] is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OWASP Zap	4.6%
Synopsys API Security Testing	0.2%
Other	95.2%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Amit Beniwal

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.

Read full review

UmarQureshi

Security Lead at a retailer with 10,001+ employees

Useful threat vectors, beneficial results, but implementation needed support

We are using Synopsys API Security Testing for scanning APIs for risks and vulnerabilities and to understand our posture before deployment within our business The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares. I have been…

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

"The OWASP's tool is free of cost, which gives it a great advantage, especially for smaller companies to make use of the tool."

"Simple and easy to learn and master."

"It updates repositories and libraries quickly."

"The most valuable feature is scanning the URL to drill down all the different sites."

"We use the solution for security testing."

"This solution has improved my organization because it has made us feel safer doing frequent deployments for web applications. If we have something really big, we might get some professional company in to help us but if we're releasing small products, we will check it ourselves with Zap. It makes it easier and safer."

"OWASP is quite matured in identifying the vulnerabilities."

"The vulnerabilities that it finds, because the primary goal is to secure applications and websites."

More OWASP Zap pros

"The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares."

Cons

"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."

"Online documentation can be improved to utilize all features of ZAP and API methods to make use in automation."

"The solution is unable to customize reports."

"It would be ideal if I could try some pre-built deployment scenarios so that I don't have to worry about whether the configuration sector team is doing it right or wrong. That would be very helpful."

"The product should allow users to customize the report based on their needs."

"Lacks resources where users can internally access a learning module from the tool."

"The automated vulnerability assessments that the application performs needs to be simplified as well as diversified."

"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."

More OWASP Zap cons

"The solution required us to use our team and we spoke to Synopsys API Security Testing's support to do the implementation. We use two people from our team for the implementation. and one person for maintenance."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is open-source."

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

"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."

"The solution’s pricing is high."

"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."

"This solution is open source and free."

More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice

Information not available

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

867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

University

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	21

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 ...

See all answers

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...

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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OWASP Zap

Compared 19% of the time

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 14% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap

Compared 11% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

No data available

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

August 2025

Download OWASP Zap product report

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

August 2025

Synopsys API Security Testing [EOL] report

Download Synopsys API Security Testing [EOL] product report

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

AppSec testing optimized for the needs of API developers
APIs provide open, flexible interfaces that enable applications and services to talk to each other. But these characteristics can also make it difficult to build secure software—and even more difficult for traditional AppSec tools to test it.

Black Duck

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

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

August 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: August 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.