Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

MetricStream vs OWASP ZAP

MetricStream logo

MetricStream

Cybersecurity

Enterprise GRC suite for large regulated organisations, with implementation costs that exceed the licence

From
On request
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

  • Only OWASP ZAP has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: MetricStream implementation typically costs one and a half to two and a half times the first year licence, so a one million dollar licence carries a one and a half to two and a half million dollar rollout that rarely appears in the initial business case.; 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: MetricStream covers Enterprise and operational risk, OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

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

Attributes where MetricStream and OWASP ZAP differ
AttributeMetricStreamOWASP ZAP
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquotefree
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWebDesktop, Cli, Api
FoundedUnknown2001

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 MetricStream

  • Enterprise and operational risk
  • Regulatory compliance
  • Internal audit
  • Third-party risk
  • Cyber risk quantification
  • Policy and case management
  • Content libraries
  • ESG reporting

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.

MetricStream

  • A multinational bank mapping one control set against obligations from several regulators and needing to evidence the mapping to examinersnot OWASP ZAP
  • An insurer consolidating separate risk, audit and vendor systems that currently produce contradictory numbers to the boardnot OWASP ZAP
  • A pharmaceutical company that must track regulatory change across jurisdictions and show what each change affectednot OWASP ZAP
  • An organisation whose three lines of defence must share one risk taxonomy rather than three overlapping spreadsheetsnot 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 MetricStream
  • Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot MetricStream
  • Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot MetricStream
  • Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot MetricStream

Where each one falls short

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

MetricStream

  • Implementation typically costs one and a half to two and a half times the first year licence, so a one million dollar licence carries a one and a half to two and a half million dollar rollout that rarely appears in the initial business case.
  • Full deployment takes six to eighteen months, during which the organisation runs old and new processes in parallel and the promised efficiency gain is negative.
  • Per-user pricing in the low thousands per year per seat discourages giving access to the first line of defence, which is precisely where risk data originates, so many deployments end up with data still arriving by spreadsheet.
  • Configuration flexibility comes at the price of specialist skills, and organisations become dependent on MetricStream partners or a small internal team, making later changes slow and expensive.
  • The interface and workflow feel enterprise-heavy next to modern compliance tools, and infrequent business users find it hard, which suppresses the participation the platform is meant to enable.

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

MetricStream

On request
  • MetricStream GRC$undefined/year
    • Enterprise risk, audit, compliance and third-party modules
    • Regulatory content libraries
    • Multi-entity and multi-jurisdiction support

OWASP ZAP

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

Which should you pick?

Choose MetricStream if

  • You need enterprise and operational risk.
  • You also want regulatory compliance.
MetricStream 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 MetricStream or OWASP ZAP better?
Neither clearly leads. MetricStream 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, MetricStream or OWASP ZAP?
OWASP ZAP has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for MetricStream and Free for OWASP ZAP.
Does MetricStream or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
MetricStream runs on Web. 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. MetricStream starts at On request.
What is MetricStream best used for?
MetricStream is most often used for a multinational bank mapping one control set against obligations from several regulators and needing to evidence the mapping to examiners, an insurer consolidating separate risk, audit and vendor systems that currently produce contradictory numbers to the board, a pharmaceutical company that must track regulatory change across jurisdictions and show what each change affected, an organisation whose three lines of defence must share one risk taxonomy rather than three overlapping spreadsheets. Of those, a multinational bank mapping one control set against obligations from several regulators and needing to evidence the mapping to examiners and an insurer consolidating separate risk, audit and vendor systems that currently produce contradictory numbers to the board are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
What can MetricStream do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
MetricStream covers Enterprise and operational risk, Regulatory compliance, Internal audit, Third-party risk. OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

MetricStream: What does MetricStream cost?

It is quoted. Market data suggests roughly 75,000 to 150,000 US dollars a year for small enterprise deployments, 250,000 to 500,000 for medium and 750,000 upwards for large.

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.

MetricStream: How long is implementation?

Six to eighteen months for a full platform deployment, and the services cost usually exceeds the first year licence.

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.

MetricStream: Is it right for a mid-market company?

Usually not. Its depth suits organisations with several regulators and formal three lines of defence structures.

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.

MetricStream: Does it replace SOC 2 automation tools?

It can cover the framework, but it is not designed for the automated evidence collection those tools do cheaply.

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 MetricStream

More on OWASP ZAP

Keep looking

Other head to heads