We performed a comparison between Parasoft SOAtest and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"The solution scans web applications and supports APIs, which are the main features I really like."
"It's good testing software."
"You can download different plugins if you don't have them in the standard edition."
"It is a time-saver application."
"It offers very good accuracy. You can trust the results."
"The solution has a pretty simple setup."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional has an intercept tab that helps us to scan our APIs, set the response, and request errors."
"The solution has a great user interface."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"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."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"In the Professional version, we cannot link it with the CI/CD process."
"Improvement should be done as per the requirements of customers."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional could improve the static code review."
"The pricing of the solution is quite high."
"Currently, the scanning is only available in the full version of Burp, and not in the Community version."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"BurpSuite has some issues regarding authentication with OAT tokens that need to be improved."
"It would be good if the solution could give us more details about what exactly is defective."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 29th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 30 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 5th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 57 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Good API testing and RIT feature; clarity could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional writes "The solution is versatile and easy to deploy, but it needs to give more detailed security reports". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and ReadyAPI, whereas PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, HCL AppScan and Qualys Web Application Scanning. See our Parasoft SOAtest vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional report.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.