Cybersecurity · head to head
OWASP ZAP vs Unit21
OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
Unit21
Cybersecurity
No-code fraud and AML risk operations platform for fintechs and neobanks
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Only OWASP ZAP has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: 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.; Unit21 it is built for fintech scale rather than card issuer scale, so organisations reaching very high transaction volumes generally re-evaluate against heavier platforms and face a migration.
- They diverge on capability: OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Unit21 covers No-code rule builder.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which OWASP ZAP and Unit21 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 OWASP ZAP
- Intercepting proxy
- Passive scanner
- Active scanner
- AJAX spider
- Automation Framework
- Headless daemon and REST API
- Docker images
- Add-on marketplace
Only in Unit21
- No-code rule builder
- Case management
- SAR filing
- Backtesting
- Identity and device signals
- Data ingestion API
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
OWASP ZAP
- Adding a baseline security scan to every application's pipeline where per-target commercial licensing would limit coverage to a handfulnot Unit21
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Unit21
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Unit21
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Unit21
Unit21
- A neobank whose sponsor bank requires a documented monitoring programme before it will keep the BIN sponsorshipnot OWASP ZAP
- A crypto exchange needing SAR filing and case management without building an internal compliance engineering teamnot OWASP ZAP
- A payments startup where the fraud lead needs to ship a new rule the same day a new attack pattern appearsnot OWASP ZAP
- A lender consolidating fraud alerts from three point tools into one investigator queue with a single audit trailnot OWASP ZAP
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal 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.
- 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.
Unit21
- It is built for fintech scale rather than card issuer scale, so organisations reaching very high transaction volumes generally re-evaluate against heavier platforms and face a migration.
- No-code rule authoring shifts power to the risk team, which is the point, but without governance it produces rule sprawl that nobody can explain to an examiner two years later.
- Detection quality depends on the signals you feed it, so a thin integration produces thin results and the platform cannot compensate with proprietary consortium data the way larger vendors do.
- Pricing is quoted by volume with an annual commitment, so a fintech whose growth stalls pays for headroom it did not use.
- SAR filing coverage is oriented to United States FinCEN reporting, so firms filing in the United Kingdom, European Union or Asia handle those submissions outside the tool.
Pricing, plan by plan
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Unit21
On request- Unit21 Platform$undefined/year
- Priced by monitored volume and modules, annual contract
- Fraud, AML and case management packaged separately
- Implementation and historical data backfill quoted with the subscription
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 OWASP ZAP or Unit21 better?
- Neither clearly leads. OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Unit21 at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, OWASP ZAP or Unit21?
- OWASP ZAP has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for OWASP ZAP and On request for Unit21.
- Does OWASP ZAP or Unit21 run on more platforms?
- OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api. Unit21 runs on Web.
- Can I use OWASP ZAP for free?
- Yes. OWASP ZAP has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Unit21 starts at On request.
- What is OWASP ZAP best used for?
- OWASP ZAP is most often used for adding a baseline security scan to every application's pipeline where per-target commercial licensing would limit coverage to a handful, manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per tester, teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselves, pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial dast subscription. Of those, adding a baseline security scan to every application's pipeline where per-target commercial licensing would limit coverage to a handful and manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per tester are not what Unit21 is typically brought in for.
- What can OWASP ZAP do that Unit21 cannot?
- OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider. Unit21 covers No-code rule builder, Case management, SAR filing, Backtesting.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
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.
Unit21: Do we need engineers to run it?
Only for the initial data integration. After that the design intent is that risk and compliance staff author and deploy rules themselves.
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.
Unit21: Does it file SARs?
Yes, it generates and electronically files suspicious activity reports to FinCEN. Non-US regimes are not covered to the same depth.
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.
Unit21: Can we test a rule before it goes live?
Yes. Backtesting against historical data to see projected alert volume is one of the more useful parts of the product, because alert volume is the real cost.
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
- 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
- OWASP ZAP vs ThetaRay
- OWASP ZAP vs Sardine
- OWASP ZAP vs NICE Actimize
- OWASP ZAP vs Featurespace ARIC Risk Hub
- OWASP ZAP vs Socure
- OWASP ZAP vs Quantexa
- OWASP ZAP vs Fenergo
- OWASP ZAP vs Transmit Security
- OWASP ZAP vs Jumio
- OWASP ZAP vs Silent Eight
- OWASP ZAP vs Sumsub
- OWASP ZAP vs IDnow
- OWASP ZAP vs Kaspersky Total Security
- OWASP ZAP vs LogicManager
- OWASP ZAP vs Mullvad VPN
- OWASP ZAP vs Private Internet Access
- Unit21 vs 1Password
- Unit21 vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Unit21 vs Norton 360
- Unit21 vs LastPass
- Unit21 vs Bitwarden
- Unit21 vs Burp Suite
- Unit21 vs Metasploit
- Unit21 vs Wireshark
- Unit21 vs authentik
- Unit21 vs Authelia
- Unit21 vs Infisical
- Unit21 vs Trivy
- Unit21 vs Feedzai
- Unit21 vs Frontegg
- Unit21 vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Unit21 vs JumpCloud
- Unit21 vs McAfee Total Protection
- Unit21 vs ThetaRay
- Unit21 vs Sardine
- Unit21 vs NICE Actimize
- Unit21 vs Featurespace ARIC Risk Hub
- Unit21 vs Socure
- Unit21 vs Quantexa
- Unit21 vs Fenergo
- Unit21 vs Transmit Security
- Unit21 vs Jumio
- Unit21 vs Silent Eight
- Unit21 vs Sumsub
- Unit21 vs IDnow
- Unit21 vs Kaspersky Total Security
- Unit21 vs LogicManager
- Unit21 vs Mullvad VPN
- Unit21 vs Private Internet Access