OpenText Silk Test vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText Silk Test and Parasoft SOAtest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Test Automation Tools Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting.""Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts.""The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature.""The statistics that are available are very good.""A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing.""The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities.""The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."

More OpenText Silk Test Pros →

"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product.""We have seen a return on investment.""If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest.""Automatic testing is the most valuable feature.""The solution is scalable.""Technical support is helpful.""Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally.""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."

More Parasoft SOAtest Pros →

Cons
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration.""Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side.""We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important.""The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve.""The support for automation with iOS applications can be better.""Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are.""The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."

More OpenText Silk Test Cons →

"The performance could be a bit better.""Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements.""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.""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.""Parasoft SOAtest has an internal refresh function where you can refresh the software to show the changes you’ve made in your projects. Unfortunately this function does not work properly, because it often does not show the changes after you’ve hit te refresh button a few times."

More Parasoft SOAtest Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "Our licensing fees are on a yearly basis, and while I think that the price is quite reasonable I am not allowed to share those details."
  • "We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."
  • More OpenText Silk Test Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn't the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer."
  • "The cost of Parasoft seems to have gotten higher with a projection that wasn't really stipulated for our company. They've done a tremendous job at negotiating those deals."
  • "I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses."
  • "It is an expensive product, so think carefully about whether it fits your purposes and is the right tool for you."
  • "We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%."
  • "The license price is a little expensive, but it provides a better outcome in terms of the end-to-end automation process."
  • "They do have a confusing licensing structure."
  • "The price is around $5,000 USD."
  • More Parasoft SOAtest Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer:Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports.
    Top Answer:Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings. Going through that is a challenge. It only happens in the initial stage when we are setting up the tool, but it can be… more »
    Ranking
    24th
    Views
    1,338
    Comparisons
    927
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    21st
    Views
    480
    Comparisons
    336
    Reviews
    4
    Average Words per Review
    440
    Rating
    7.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
    SOAtest
    Learn More
    Parasoft
    Video Not Available
    Interactive Demo
    Overview
    SilkTest is robust and portable test automation for web, native, and enterprise software applications. Silk Test's portability enables users to test applications more effectively with lower complexity and cost in comparison to other functional testing tools on the market. Silk Test's role based testing enables business stakeholders, QA engineers, and developers to contribute to the whole automation testing process, which drives collaboration and increases the effectiveness of software testing.

    Parasoft SOAtest delivers fully integrated API and web service testing capabilities that automate end-to-end functional API testing. Streamline automated testing with advanced codeless test creation for applications with multiple interfaces (REST & SOAP APIs, microservices, databases, and more).

    SOAtest reduces the risk of security breaches and performance outages by transforming functional testing artifacts into security and load equivalents. Such reuse, along with continuous monitoring of APIs for change, allows faster and more efficient testing.

    Sample Customers
    Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
    Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company20%
    Financial Services Firm15%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Comms Service Provider6%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm43%
    Government14%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Energy/Utilities Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Manufacturing Company14%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Government4%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise60%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise69%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise69%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise75%
    Buyer's Guide
    Test Automation Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText Silk Test is ranked 24th in Test Automation Tools while Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 21st in Test Automation Tools with 30 reviews. OpenText Silk Test is rated 7.6, while Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText Silk Test writes "Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". OpenText Silk Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Apache JMeter, OpenText UFT Developer and SmartBear TestComplete, whereas Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Tricentis Tosca.

    See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Functional Testing Tools vendors.

    We monitor all Test Automation 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.