We performed a comparison between Apigee and Parasoft SOAtest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"Apigee is a very lightweight solution."
"It nice and easy for the clients and those using the product to access the product's help resources."
"Apigee is a strong-featured solution. It leads in Gartner Quadrant ratings and it is a full-slated API solution that has the features that an API gateway requires."
"Items around the mobilization of the API interface and the ability to automate validations for our APIs are the most valuable aspects."
"Apigee has proven to be one of the best of the breed."
"Lifecycle management."
"A simple platform that's easier to work with than IBM API Connect. Support for it is really good and gives it advantage over other providers."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"We can automate our scenarios in a data driven format, which shows there is no rework on scripts. We only need to update the test data and run for a number of scenarios."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"There should be an integrated continuous integration and continuous deployment approach with Apigee. Currently, for development at a more integrated level, you have set it up yourself."
"The number one area this solution could be improved is by implementing support. Support is not a part of this solution."
"We need better performance monitoring."
"As it is now, the rotation of certificates is a manual task and is something that can be improved."
"The integration could be improved within the solution. There is a need to pay more attention to this."
"Integration should be improved."
"The user interface could be better. It could be easier to navigate and more user-friendly."
"The technical support could be improved because their response time is slow."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"During the process of working with SOAtest and building test cases, the .TST files will grow. A negative side effect is that saving your changes takes more time."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
Apigee is ranked 6th in API Testing Tools with 82 reviews while Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 9th in API Testing Tools with 30 reviews. Apigee is rated 8.2, while Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Apigee writes "Has a robust community and outstanding performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Good API testing and RIT feature; clarity could be improved". Apigee is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, IBM API Connect, WSO2 API Manager, Amazon API Gateway and Layer7 API Management, whereas Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and ReadyAPI. See our Apigee vs. Parasoft SOAtest report.
See our list of best API Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all API Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.