We performed a comparison between Parasoft SOAtest and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"The solution is scalable."
"Technical support is helpful."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"It is a very common and strong product. A lot of support is available for this product."
"The product is good to create big or small projects fastly. It is one of the leaders in the area."
"The most valuable features of Visual Studio Test Professional are the IntelliSense and the ease of adding the NuGet packages."
"We are satisfied with technical support. Communicating with them is very simple. We also have a lot of online resources to check and to study and to train our team with. The documentation is very clear and readily available."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a very scalable solution."
"The ability to quickly make your own components has been valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the in-built support for C# and .NET projects."
"Easy to use and easily scalable."
"Enabling/disabling an optional element of an XML request is only possible if a data source (e.g., Excel sheet) is connected to the test. Otherwise, the option is not available at all in the drop-down menu."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"The database administration could be better; you should be able to choose new tools with the development environment in Visual Studio. It could be easier to use."
"The solution's deployment is not very easy and should be made easier."
"The integration with Git needs improving because it is a bit disjointed and unpredictable."
"Visual Studio Test Professional should include more automation."
"We would like to be able to easily integrate this solution with our continuous integration tools, such as Jenkins."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"It needs more integration with other tools for monitoring. Microsoft also needs to make it more modern to make it work with microservices and the cloud. It is a bit outdated currently."
"The solution should be cheaper."
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 24th in Functional Testing Tools with 30 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 7th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Klocwork, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and TestRail. See our Parasoft SOAtest vs. Visual Studio Test Professional report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional 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.
