Softwr

Accounting · head to head

Lago vs OWASP ZAP

Lago logo

Lago

Accounting

Open-source billing infrastructure for usage-based models

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
OWASP ZAP logo

OWASP ZAP

Cybersecurity

Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Lago free tier limited to 10,000 entities per month with 5M event cap; 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: Lago covers Real-time usage metering, OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Lago and OWASP ZAP actually diverge.

Attributes where Lago and OWASP ZAP differ
AttributeLagoOWASP ZAP
Pricing modelFreemium with optional paid tiersfree
PlatformsWeb, Cloud, Self-hosted, On-premise, VPCDesktop, Cli, Api
CategoryAccountingCybersecurity
FoundedUnknown2001

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), 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 Lago

  • Real-time usage metering
  • Multiple pricing models
  • Automated invoicing
  • Prepaid credits
  • Entitlements
  • Multi-currency support
  • Payment orchestration
  • Revenue analytics

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.

Lago

  • Building usage-based billing for high-volume APIs and infrastructurenot OWASP ZAP
  • Implementing metered billing for AI and tokenized servicesnot OWASP ZAP
  • Creating subscription and hybrid pricing modelsnot OWASP ZAP
  • Managing multi-currency billing for global companiesnot OWASP ZAP
  • Maintaining billing infrastructure without vendor lock-innot 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 Lago
  • Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Lago
  • Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Lago
  • Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Lago

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Lago

  • Free tier limited to 10,000 entities per month with 5M event cap
  • No specific pricing published for Pro annual plan or Scale plan
  • Self-hosted and on-premise deployments require engineering resources
  • Community support only on free tier
  • Scale plan requires annual contracts and sales engagement

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

Lago

Free
  • Build (Free)Free
    • 10,000 managed entities per month
    • 5M usage events per month
    • 1K events per second rate limit
  • Pro$399/month
    • 10,000 entities included (graduated pricing to 100K)
    • 25M usage events included (to 500M with graduated rates)
    • 10K events per second (upgradeable to 100K)
  • Scale$null/custom
    • Custom entity and event volumes
    • 50K events per second (upgradeable to 100K)
    • RBAC and SSO (SAML)

OWASP ZAP

Free
  • Free & Open SourceFree
    • Full functionality
    • Active & passive scanning
    • Spider

Which should you pick?

Choose Lago if

  • You need real-time usage metering.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, Cloud, Self-hosted, On-premise, VPC.
  • You also want multiple pricing models.
Lago review

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.
OWASP ZAP review

Questions people ask

Is Lago or OWASP ZAP better?
Neither clearly leads. Lago starts at Free and OWASP ZAP at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Lago or OWASP ZAP?
Lago starts at Free and OWASP ZAP at Free.
Does Lago or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
Lago runs on Web, Cloud, Self-hosted, On-premise, VPC. OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api.
Can I use Lago for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Lago best used for?
Lago is most often used for building usage-based billing for high-volume apis and infrastructure, implementing metered billing for ai and tokenized services, creating subscription and hybrid pricing models, managing multi-currency billing for global companies. Of those, building usage-based billing for high-volume apis and infrastructure and implementing metered billing for ai and tokenized services are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
What can Lago do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
Lago covers Real-time usage metering, Multiple pricing models, Automated invoicing, Prepaid credits. OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Lago: Can I use Lago open-source for free?

Yes, Lago is open-source under the AGPLv3 license and can be self-hosted. The cloud-based Build plan is also free with limits of 10,000 entities and 5M events per month.

Source
OWASP 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.

Lago: What payment providers does Lago integrate with?

Lago integrates with Stripe and Adyen for payment processing. It is not a payment processor itself but orchestrates payments through these providers.

Source
OWASP 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.

Lago: Does Lago support multiple currencies?

Yes, Lago supports multi-currency billing with automatic currency conversion for global businesses.

Source
OWASP 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.

Share

Related pages

More on Lago

More on OWASP ZAP

Keep looking

Other head to heads