We performed a comparison between Parasoft SOAtest and Veracode 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."We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"Technical support is helpful."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"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."
"The solution is scalable."
"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."
"We have to look at it from the perspectives of how important it is to fix something and when it should be prioritized for fixing. The JSON output from the agent-based scans gives us the CVS core, and that makes things much easier."
"Veracode's technical support is great. They assigned us a TAM and once a week, we have a brief engagement with the TAM to verify that everything's going well. If we have any outstanding issues, they get serviced and addressed."
"I like Veracode's ease of integration and onboarding. You can quickly and easily get started with a new project or application. That's one area where Veracode shines relative to other tools we've evaluated. Other tools need more work or an engineer to do the setup. With Veracode, you can do the onboarding in a few steps quickly."
"Because it is a SaaS offering, I do not have to support the infrastructure."
"I like the way the flaws are reported in the system."
"It gives feedback to developers on the effectiveness of their secure coding practices."
"The reporting being highly accurate is pretty cool. I use another product and I was always looking for answers as to what line, which part of the code, was wrong, and what to do about it. Veracode seems to have a solid database to look things up and a website to look things up."
"The platform itself has a lot of AppSec best practices information, especially in the mitigation recommendation process."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"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."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"The scanning could be a little faster. The process around three or four minutes, but it would help if it could be further reduced."
"Ideally, I would like better reporting that gives me a more concise and accurate description of what my pain points are, and how to get to them."
"We tried to create an automatic scanning process for Veracode and integrate it into our billing process, but it was easier to adopt it to repositories based on GIT. Until now, our source control repository was Azure DevOps Server (Microsoft TFS) to managing our resources. This was not something that they supported. It took us some sessions together before we successfully implemented it."
"In the next release, I would like a proper way of packaging files for scanning and the packing of IOS apps and API Dynamic scan methodology."
"While Veracode is way ahead of its competitors on Gartner Magic Quadrant, it's a bit more expensive than Fortify. It's a good solution for the cost, but if we had a high budget, we would go with Checkmarx, which is much better than Veracode."
"Reporting. Some of the reporting features of Veracode do need improvement. They do not have the most robust access to data. That would be a bit more beneficial to a lot of our clients as well as our actual in-house staff. I've been talking to our program management at Veracode about that, and that is actually on their radar to have that improved, I think actually this year."
"The GUI requires significant simplification, as its current complexity creates a steep learning curve for new users."
"Static scanning takes a long time, so you need to patiently wait for the scan to achieve. I also think the software could be more accurate. It isn't 100 percent, so you shouldn't completely rely on Veracode. You need to manually verify its findings."
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 29th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 30 reviews while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 194 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2, while Veracode is rated 8.2. 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 Veracode writes "Helps to reduce false positives and prevent vulnerable code from entering production, but does not support incremental scanning ". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Selenium HQ, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Fortify Static Code Analyzer. See our Parasoft SOAtest vs. Veracode 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.
