AI Indexes
IT AI Index
Index › Developer platform › DAST › OWASP ZAP vs StackHawk
Dynamic application security testing · October 2026 Edition

OWASP ZAP vs StackHawk

Zero of fourteen models named OWASP ZAP first on the direct prompt; three named StackHawk. OWASP ZAP was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and StackHawk by thirteen and OWASP ZAP carries 54 labels and StackHawk 30, so the shares are not directly comparable.

OWASP ZAP

criticized challenger

Named in four categories this edition.

StackHawk

accepted challenger

Named in three categories this edition.

First-choice share29%8%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate30%3%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#1#4A position in a field of 11; printed, not drawn.
Labels5430A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, OWASP ZAP reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Invicti was named alongside these two in nine of the fourteen direct answers. OWASP ZAP vs Invicti · OWASP ZAP vs Acunetix · OWASP ZAP vs Bright Security

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the dynamic application security testing page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
OWASP ZAPFirst choices, of fourteen modelsStackHawk
Direct033 against OWASP ZAP
Paraphrase102 against OWASP ZAP
Comparative101 against OWASP ZAP
Budget-constrained1401 against StackHawk
Scale-constrained011 against OWASP ZAP
Negative219 against OWASP ZAP
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Across every category in the October 2026 Edition, OWASP ZAP and StackHawk were named in the same answer eighty-two times, of the 188 answers naming OWASP ZAP and the 147 naming StackHawk. In those answers StackHawk took the first choice seventeen times and OWASP ZAP thirty-four.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where OWASP ZAP and StackHawk stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.1 Fast
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30B
OWASP ZAP StackHawk first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, OWASP ZAP on the left and StackHawk on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where OWASP ZAP and StackHawk stood in it.

StackHawk first, OWASP ZAP an alternative

3 of 14 modelsOWASP ZAP was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.
DeepSeek V4 FlashStackHawk alternatives: Escape, Intruder, Invicti
Kimi K2Bright Security, StackHawk alternatives: Acunetix, Invicti
GLM 4.7 FlashXStackHawk alternatives: OWASP ZAP, Rapid7 InsightAppSec

Neither was the first choice, one was named

5 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
Claude Haiku 4.5Invicti alternatives: Acunetix, Intruder, OWASP ZAP, Rapid7 InsightAppSec
Gemini 3.5 FlashEscape alternatives: Astra Security, Invicti, StackHawk
MiniMax M2.5Invicti alternatives: Acunetix, Aikido Security, Burp Suite, OWASP ZAP, Rapid7 InsightAppSec
GPT-6 LunaInvicti alternatives: Burp Suite DAST, StackHawk
Muse Glimmer 30BInvicti alternatives: Acunetix, Burp Suite, OWASP ZAP

Neither was named

6 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
GPT-5.4 miniAcunetix, Invicti alternatives: Burp Suite
Perplexity SonarBright Security alternatives: Acunetix, Beagle Security, Detectify, Intruder
Grok 4.1 FastIntruder alternatives: Acunetix, Astra Security
Mistral SmallBurp Suite Enterprise Edition, Intruder alternatives: Aikido Security
Llama 4 MaverickBurp Suite Enterprise Edition alternatives: Aikido Security, AppCheck, Intruder
Qwen 3.7 FlashIntruder alternatives: Acunetix, Aikido Security, Invicti

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
OWASP ZAP leads by thirty points.
OWASP ZAP43%#1 of 12
StackHawk12%#3 of 12
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
OWASP ZAP leads by twenty-two points.
OWASP ZAP29%#1 of 11
StackHawk8%#4 of 11
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: StackHawk leads at enterprise.
StackHawk2%#9 of 14
OWASP ZAP0%#14 of 14
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about OWASP ZAP

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.

“The Verdict: Avoid for CI/CD pipelines. Use only if you have dedicated in-house pentesters.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · negative prompt · hard negative
“High false positive rates require significant manual tuning and expertise... Avoid if: You're new to security testing or need low-maintenance automation.” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · soft negative
“While OWASP ZAP is excellent and free, mid-sized B2B companies typically: Lack dedicated security teams to tune and manage false positives” Kimi K2 · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“For most small to medium-sized companies just starting with DAST, OWASP ZAP is typically the best choice due to its zero cost, robust features, and strong community support.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“the best DAST tool is usually OWASP ZAP because it is free, open-source, extensible, and widely recommended as the default starting point” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · first choice
“OWASP ZAP (Zed Attack Proxy) is widely considered the best Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) tool available.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about StackHawk

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Two of two in this category shown.

“tools like StackHawk are built on ZAP, but they're not the cheapest option for a tight budget” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · soft negative
“For most mid-market B2B companies, StackHawk offers the best balance of features, pricing, and developer experience.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · direct prompt · first choice
Also compared

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.