Invicti vs OWASP ZAP
Feature checklists rarely decide anything. What decides it is the pricing metric, who has to write the tests, and which limitation you can live with.
Entry price
Quote on request
Quote onlyFree and open source
Open sourceWhat drives the bill
The metric that actually scales your invoice.
Enterprise licensing by number of target sites or applications.
Free and open source. You pay in engineering time and CI minutes.
Free tier
Demo and trial on request.
Everything, self-hosted
Open source
Apache-2.0
Self-hostable
No-code authoring
Languages
Platforms
Fits teams
Adoption
Established
Invicti Security · since 2009
Category standard
Checkmarx / OWASP · since 2010
Strengths
- Proof-based scanning eliminates most false-positive triage, which is the main cost of DAST.
- Handles authenticated scanning of modern JavaScript applications well.
- Good asset discovery for organisations that do not know all their own sites.
- Free, with no licence limits on scanning or users.
- The baseline scan runs in CI in a couple of minutes and catches real misconfiguration.
- Active community and extensive add-on marketplace.
Limitations
- Expensive relative to free DAST alternatives.
- Scans take time and are not suited to per-commit feedback.
- Dynamic testing alone cannot find everything a code review would.
- Higher false-positive rate than commercial DAST tools.
- Scanning authenticated, JavaScript-heavy applications requires meaningful configuration effort.
- The interface is dated and the learning curve is real.
Best for
Organisations with many web applications and no capacity to triage scanner noise.
Any team that currently does no dynamic security testing at all.
All of these integrate with: Jenkins.
Pricing last reviewed August 2026 and is indicative only — confirm on each vendor’s own page.