Cybersecurity · head to head
Metasploit vs OWASP ZAP
Metasploit
Cybersecurity
The world's most used penetration testing framework
- From
- Free
- 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
- Each has a real cost: Metasploit the free Framework edition is command line only; the web interface is Pro only; 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: Metasploit covers Exploit database, OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Metasploit and OWASP ZAP actually diverge.
| Attribute | Metasploit | OWASP ZAP |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | freemium | free |
| Platforms | Desktop, Cli | Desktop, Cli, Api |
| Founded | 2000 | 2001 |
Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), 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 Metasploit
- Exploit database
- Payload generation
- Post-exploitation
- Evasion modules
- Auxiliary scanners
- Social engineering
- Credential harvesting
- Session management
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.
Metasploit
- Penetration testing and exploit development against known vulnerabilitiesnot OWASP ZAP
- Validating whether a reported vulnerability is actually exploitablenot OWASP ZAP
- Running phishing and credential attack simulations on the Pro editionnot 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 Metasploit
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Metasploit
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Metasploit
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Metasploit
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Metasploit
- The free Framework edition is command line only; the web interface is Pro only
- Automated exploitation, automated credential attacks and antivirus evading dynamic payloads are restricted to Metasploit Pro
- Reporting, audit wizards, task chains and closed loop vulnerability validation are Pro only
- Rapid7 publishes no price for Metasploit Pro and routes buyers to contact sales
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
Metasploit
Free- Metasploit Framework (OSS)Free
- Open source
- 1500+ exploits
- Command line
- Metasploit ProFree
- Web interface
- Automated testing
- Phishing campaigns
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Which should you pick?
Choose Metasploit if
- You need exploit database.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Desktop, Cli.
- You also want payload generation.
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 Metasploit or OWASP ZAP better?
- Neither clearly leads. Metasploit 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, Metasploit or OWASP ZAP?
- Metasploit starts at Free and OWASP ZAP at Free.
- Does Metasploit or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
- Metasploit runs on Desktop, Cli. OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api.
- Can I use Metasploit for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Metasploit best used for?
- Metasploit is most often used for penetration testing and exploit development against known vulnerabilities, validating whether a reported vulnerability is actually exploitable, running phishing and credential attack simulations on the pro edition. Of those, penetration testing and exploit development against known vulnerabilities and validating whether a reported vulnerability is actually exploitable are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
- What can Metasploit do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
- Metasploit covers Exploit database, Payload generation, Post-exploitation, Evasion modules. OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Metasploit: Is Metasploit Framework free to use?
Yes, Metasploit Framework is available as free open-source software with source code accessible via GitHub. Community support is provided through Slack, GitHub, Twitter, and email.
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.
Metasploit: What is the difference between Metasploit Framework and Metasploit Pro?
Metasploit Framework is the free open-source version. Metasploit Pro is a commercial offering with customer support from Rapid7, though specific pricing and features are not detailed on the download page.
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.
Metasploit: What support is available for the free Framework version?
Community-based support for Metasploit Framework is available through Slack, GitHub, Twitter, and email ([email protected]). Commercial customers using Metasploit Pro receive customer support from Rapid7.
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
- Metasploit vs 1Password
- Metasploit vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Metasploit vs Norton 360
- Metasploit vs LastPass
- Metasploit vs Burp Suite
- Metasploit vs Syft
- Metasploit vs Wireshark
- Metasploit vs HashiCorp Vault
- Metasploit vs Bitwarden
- Metasploit vs Semgrep
- Metasploit vs Passbolt
- Metasploit vs RoboForm
- Metasploit vs Sardine
- Metasploit vs Semperis
- Metasploit vs SentinelOne
- Metasploit vs Shufti Pro
- Metasploit vs SentinelOne Singularity
- Metasploit vs authentik
- Metasploit vs Authelia
- Metasploit vs Infisical
- Metasploit vs Trivy
- Metasploit vs Feedzai
- Metasploit vs Frontegg
- Metasploit vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Metasploit vs JumpCloud
- Metasploit vs McAfee Total Protection
- OWASP ZAP vs 1Password
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitdefender Total Security
- OWASP ZAP vs Norton 360
- OWASP ZAP vs LastPass
- OWASP ZAP vs Burp Suite
- OWASP ZAP vs Syft
- OWASP ZAP vs Wireshark
- OWASP ZAP vs HashiCorp Vault
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitwarden
- OWASP ZAP vs Semgrep
- OWASP ZAP vs Passbolt
- OWASP ZAP vs RoboForm
- OWASP ZAP vs Sardine
- OWASP ZAP vs Semperis
- OWASP ZAP vs SentinelOne
- OWASP ZAP vs Shufti Pro
- OWASP ZAP vs SentinelOne Singularity
- 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