Developer Tools · head to head
GoLand vs OWASP ZAP

GoLand
Developer Tools
JetBrains IDE for developing applications in Go
- From
- $24/month
- Free plan
- No

OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Free plan
- Yes
The short version
- Only OWASP ZAP has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: GoLand requires a paid subscription with no permanently free tier for commercial use.; 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.
- They diverge on capability: GoLand covers Smart code completion, OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which GoLand and OWASP ZAP actually diverge.
Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated).
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 GoLand
- Smart code completion
- Integrated debugger
- Refactoring tools
- Version control integration
- Docker and Kubernetes support
- Built-in terminal and database tools
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.
GoLand
- Developing Go microservices and backend systemsnot OWASP ZAP
- Debugging and profiling Go applicationsnot OWASP ZAP
- Working with Docker and Kubernetes deploymentsnot OWASP ZAP
- Refactoring large Go codebasesnot 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 GoLand
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot GoLand
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot GoLand
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot GoLand
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
GoLand
- Requires a paid subscription with no permanently free tier for commercial use.
- Heavier resource usage than lightweight text editors like Vim or Sublime Text.
- Primarily optimized for Go, so multi-language teams may prefer a broader IDE like VS Code or IntelliJ Ultimate.
- License renewal pricing increases after the first year if a subscription lapses.
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
GoLand
$24/month- Individual$24/month
- Personal use license
- Access to GoLand
- Free for students and open-source maintainers
- Organization$34/month
- Business use license
- Access to GoLand
- Volume and renewal discounts
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Which should you pick?
Choose GoLand if
- You need smart code completion.
- You work on windows, mac, linux.
- You also want integrated debugger.
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 GoLand or OWASP ZAP better?
- Neither clearly leads. GoLand starts at $24/month and OWASP ZAP at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, GoLand or OWASP ZAP?
- OWASP ZAP has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at $24/month for GoLand and Free for OWASP ZAP.
- Does GoLand or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
- GoLand runs on windows, mac, linux. 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. GoLand starts at $24/month.
- What is GoLand best used for?
- GoLand is most often used for developing go microservices and backend systems, debugging and profiling go applications, working with docker and kubernetes deployments, refactoring large go codebases. Of those, developing go microservices and backend systems and debugging and profiling go applications are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
- What can GoLand do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
- GoLand covers Smart code completion, Integrated debugger, Refactoring tools, Version control integration. OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
GoLand: How much does GoLand cost?
GoLand is sold as a JetBrains Toolbox subscription starting around $24/month for individuals and $34/month for organizations, with discounts for longer commitments and free licenses for students and open-source maintainers.
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.
GoLand: Is there a free trial?
JetBrains offers a free trial period for GoLand before requiring purchase of a Toolbox subscription license.
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.
GoLand: What platforms does GoLand run on?
GoLand runs on Windows, macOS, and Linux as a desktop application distributed through JetBrains Toolbox.
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
- GoLand vs Visual Studio Code
- GoLand vs Sweep
- GoLand vs Eclipse IDE
- GoLand vs Cody
- GoLand vs GitHub Copilot
- GoLand vs CLion
- GoLand vs Bazel
- GoLand vs Harness
- GoLand vs Helix
- GoLand vs Garden
- GoLand vs GitLab CI/CD
- GoLand vs Helm
- GoLand vs Notepad++
- GoLand vs Prettier
- GoLand vs StackBlitz
- GoLand vs Steampipe
- GoLand vs Tilt
- GoLand vs WarpBuild
- GoLand vs 1Password
- GoLand vs Bitdefender Total Security
- GoLand vs Norton 360
- GoLand vs LastPass
- GoLand vs Bitwarden
- GoLand vs Burp Suite
- GoLand vs Metasploit
- GoLand vs Wireshark
- GoLand vs authentik
- GoLand vs Authelia
- GoLand vs Infisical
- GoLand vs Trivy
- GoLand vs Feedzai
- GoLand vs Frontegg
- GoLand vs HashiCorp Boundary
- GoLand vs JumpCloud
- GoLand vs McAfee Total Protection
- OWASP ZAP vs Visual Studio Code
- OWASP ZAP vs Sweep
- OWASP ZAP vs Eclipse IDE
- OWASP ZAP vs Cody
- OWASP ZAP vs GitHub Copilot
- OWASP ZAP vs CLion
- OWASP ZAP vs Bazel
- OWASP ZAP vs Harness
- OWASP ZAP vs Helix
- OWASP ZAP vs Garden
- OWASP ZAP vs GitLab CI/CD
- OWASP ZAP vs Helm
- OWASP ZAP vs Notepad++
- OWASP ZAP vs Prettier
- OWASP ZAP vs StackBlitz
- OWASP ZAP vs Steampipe
- OWASP ZAP vs Tilt
- OWASP ZAP vs WarpBuild
- OWASP ZAP vs 1Password
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitdefender Total Security
- OWASP ZAP vs Norton 360
- OWASP ZAP vs LastPass
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitwarden
- OWASP ZAP vs Burp Suite
- 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
