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."Anyone with basic knowledge can build an API."
"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."
"I have found the most valuable features to be tracing a proxy, and managing proxy versions and revisions via the Edge UI component."
"Items around the mobilization of the API interface and the ability to automate validations for our APIs are the most valuable aspects."
"Apigee gives you plenty of opportunities to set up your workspace depending on how you want to manage your APIs."
"The ease of creating policies has been the most useful of the solution's features. It's a quick ramp-up time. It's easy for our support staff to implement the policies in the API management layer."
"This is a front-layer gateway that helps to improve our overall performance."
"The most important feature is the security capabilities and the way it integrates very quickly with other security providers. We have integrated it with Azure and it integrates quite seamlessly."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"The solution is pretty expensive."
"Apigee could do more to make users aware of what is available in the add-ons."
"In terms of the functionalities of a typical API gateway, Apigee is actually doing its job, but when it involves integration with backend applications, which some gateways have, I don't believe it has this functionality. You have to do Java or do some other low-level coding before you are able to do the integration. Apigee has a lot of components, which means that management will be a bit difficult. It probably has ten different components, and all of these components leverage open-source utilities, such as NGINX. When those open-source vendors upgrade their utility, Apigee usually lags behind because they need to do a lot of tests and any required development in their own platform. They need to do rigorous testing to make sure that nothing breaks. Because of that, it takes them a while to upgrade whatever components have been upgraded by the open-source vendor that owns the utility. We've been chasing them for a particular upgrade for well over a year and a half, and they have not done that upgrade. It is creating a security risk for us as an enterprise, but that upgrade has not been done, even though the open-source vendor, the owner of the utility, has upgraded it a long time ago."
"Apigee is more of an entry level solution that does basic things pretty well, but if you want to go more customizable, you want to really look for another solution."
"Apigee is demanding on the infrastructure so the setup cost is very high for an on-premises deployment."
"The cost of the solution is quite high."
"The company needs to better support webhooks. It used to support webhooks and their policies and they have since stopped. They had some issues in the product and they abandoned the support for them. It's not come back since."
"I would like to see SOAP services and socket-based connectivity developed."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"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."
"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."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
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.
