Cybersecurity · head to head
Drata vs OWASP ZAP
Drata
Cybersecurity
Agentic trust management with compliance automation.
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Only OWASP ZAP has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: Drata no published pricing for any tier; requires contacting sales team for quotes; OWASP ZAP authenticated scanning of modern single-page applications is the hard part and ZAP makes you build it by hand: session handling, token refresh and login scripts are configured per application, and a misconfigured session means the scanner logs itself out and reports a clean result for pages it never reached.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Drata and OWASP ZAP actually diverge.
Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (Cybersecurity).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in Drata
Nothing recorded that OWASP ZAP does not also cover.
Only in OWASP ZAP
- Intercepting proxy
- Passive scanner
- Active scanner
- AJAX spider
- Automation Framework
- Headless daemon and REST API
- Docker images
- Add-on marketplace
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Drata
- SaaS companies automating SOC 2 certification for enterprise salesnot OWASP ZAP
- Organisations managing multi-framework compliance simultaneouslynot OWASP ZAP
- Vendor management programmes requiring third-party security assessmentsnot OWASP ZAP
- Enterprises implementing AI governance and monitoring AI systemsnot OWASP ZAP
- Organisations seeking continuous compliance monitoring rather than point-in-time auditsnot OWASP ZAP
OWASP ZAP
- Adding a baseline security scan to every application's pipeline where per-target commercial licensing would limit coverage to a handfulnot Drata
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Drata
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Drata
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Drata
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Drata
- No published pricing for any tier; requires contacting sales team for quotes
- Solution tiers (Startup, Growth, Enterprise) are marketing categories with no corresponding published prices or feature differentiation
- No transparency on cost per framework, per user, or based on organisational size
- AI questionnaire automation claims 375+ hours saved annually but does not publish per-questionnaire costs or limits
- Compared directly with Vanta by customers, but pricing opaque for cost-benefit analysis
OWASP ZAP
- Authenticated scanning of modern single-page applications is the hard part and ZAP makes you build it by hand: session handling, token refresh and login scripts are configured per application, and a misconfigured session means the scanner logs itself out and reports a clean result for pages it never reached.
- There is no support contract in the product, so when a scan breaks the day before a release the escalation path is a GitHub issue and a community chat, which is not an answer that satisfies a delivery manager or an auditor who wants a named responsible party.
- Active scanning sends genuine attack traffic, so it can create records, trigger emails, exhaust rate limits or destabilise a fragile environment, and pointing it at production without prior agreement produces an incident rather than a test result.
- Output needs triage: passive rules generate large volumes of low-severity informational findings about headers and cookie flags that bury the few results that matter, and a team without someone tuning the rule set stops reading the report within a few sprints.
- As a dynamic scanner it can only test what it can reach, so authorisation flaws between accounts, business logic abuse and anything behind an undiscovered endpoint go unreported, and a passing ZAP scan is evidence of nothing more than the absence of the classes of bug it looks for.
Pricing, plan by plan
Drata
On request- Startup$undefined/variable
- 'Launch Trust Fast' with automated evidence collection
- SOC 2 and other framework support
- Basic compliance automation
- Growth$undefined/variable
- 'Accelerate Trust Smoothly' as teams expand
- Multi-framework compliance
- Enhanced AI automation
- Enterprise$undefined/variable
- 'Command Trust at Scale' for complex needs
- Advanced GRC capabilities
- Dedicated support
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Which should you pick?
Choose OWASP ZAP if
- You need intercepting proxy.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Desktop, Cli, Api.
- You also want passive scanner.
Questions people ask
- Is Drata or OWASP ZAP better?
- Neither clearly leads. Drata starts at On request and OWASP ZAP at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Drata or OWASP ZAP?
- OWASP ZAP has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Drata and Free for OWASP ZAP.
- Does Drata or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
- Drata runs on Web, API. OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api.
- Can I use OWASP ZAP for free?
- Yes. OWASP ZAP has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Drata starts at On request.
- What is Drata best used for?
- Drata is most often used for saas companies automating soc 2 certification for enterprise sales, organisations managing multi-framework compliance simultaneously, vendor management programmes requiring third-party security assessments, enterprises implementing ai governance and monitoring ai systems. Of those, saas companies automating soc 2 certification for enterprise sales and organisations managing multi-framework compliance simultaneously are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
- What can Drata do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
- OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Drata: What compliance frameworks does Drata support?
Drata supports multiple frameworks including SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, PCI DSS and others, with multi-framework management capabilities.
SourceOWASP ZAP: Is it still called OWASP ZAP?
The project left OWASP in August 2024 and is now governed by the Software Security Project, with core development sponsored by Checkmarx. The tool is now just ZAP, though most existing documentation, courses and search results still use the OWASP name.
Drata: Does Drata automate questionnaires?
Yes. Drata's AI uses approved content to draft consistent responses, automating questionnaire completion and saving claimed 375+ hours per year.
SourceOWASP ZAP: Is it free for commercial use?
Yes. It is Apache 2.0 licensed, with no per-application, per-scan or per-user cost, and it can be used and modified commercially without a licence agreement.
Drata: How many customers does Drata have?
Drata serves 8,500+ global customers ranging from startups to enterprises, with a 4.8/5.0 rating on G2.
SourceOWASP ZAP: Can it replace a penetration test?
No. It automates checks for known vulnerability classes against endpoints it can reach. It does not reason about business logic, chain findings into an attack, or test authorisation between accounts, which is most of what a tester actually does.
OWASP ZAP: Does it run in CI?
Yes, through the official Docker images and the Automation Framework, which defines scan jobs in YAML so configuration lives in the repository. A baseline passive scan is the usual starting point because it is fast and non-intrusive.
OWASP ZAP: How does it compare to Burp Suite?
Burp Suite Professional is the more polished manual testing tool and has a stronger scanner and extension ecosystem, but it is licensed per tester and Burp Suite Enterprise per target. ZAP is the better fit where cost per target is the binding constraint; many teams use both.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Drata vs Norton 360
- Drata vs LogicManager
- Drata vs 1Password
- Drata vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Drata vs LastPass
- Drata vs Vanta
- Drata vs OneTrust
- Drata vs Transcend
- Drata vs Silent Eight
- Drata vs NICE Actimize
- Drata vs Omada Identity
- Drata vs Saviynt
- Drata vs Burp Suite
- Drata vs Check Point Software
- Drata vs Cybereason Defense Platform
- Drata vs Darktrace
- Drata vs Diligent
- Drata vs Bitdefender VPN
- Drata vs Bitwarden
- Drata vs Metasploit
- Drata vs Wireshark
- Drata vs authentik
- Drata vs Authelia
- Drata vs Infisical
- Drata vs Trivy
- Drata vs Feedzai
- Drata vs Frontegg
- Drata vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Drata vs JumpCloud
- Drata vs McAfee Total Protection
- OWASP ZAP vs Norton 360
- OWASP ZAP vs LogicManager
- OWASP ZAP vs 1Password
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitdefender Total Security
- OWASP ZAP vs LastPass
- OWASP ZAP vs Vanta
- OWASP ZAP vs OneTrust
- OWASP ZAP vs Transcend
- OWASP ZAP vs Silent Eight
- OWASP ZAP vs NICE Actimize
- OWASP ZAP vs Omada Identity
- OWASP ZAP vs Saviynt
- OWASP ZAP vs Burp Suite
- OWASP ZAP vs Check Point Software
- OWASP ZAP vs Cybereason Defense Platform
- OWASP ZAP vs Darktrace
- OWASP ZAP vs Diligent
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitdefender VPN
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitwarden
- OWASP ZAP vs Metasploit
- OWASP ZAP vs Wireshark
- OWASP ZAP vs authentik
- OWASP ZAP vs Authelia
- OWASP ZAP vs Infisical
- OWASP ZAP vs Trivy
- OWASP ZAP vs Feedzai
- OWASP ZAP vs Frontegg
- OWASP ZAP vs HashiCorp Boundary
- OWASP ZAP vs JumpCloud
- OWASP ZAP vs McAfee Total Protection