OpenText UFT Developer 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 UFT Developer and Parasoft SOAtest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT Developer vs. Parasoft SOAtest 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
"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library.""The cost is the most important factor in this tool.""The most valuable features are the object repository.""Integrates well with other products.""This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us.""It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE.""The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks.""The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."

More OpenText UFT Developer Pros →

"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic.""If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest.""The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest.""Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization.""Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports.""Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in.""The solution is scalable.""We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."

More Parasoft SOAtest Pros →

Cons
"The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement.""Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful.""It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute.""In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable.""We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated.""The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added.""It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support.""The pricing could be improved."

More OpenText UFT Developer Cons →

"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 performance could be a bit better.""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.""Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements.""Reporting facilities can be better.""Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings.""The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."

More Parasoft SOAtest Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
  • "The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
  • "The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
  • "When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."
  • "It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
  • "The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
  • "Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."
  • "The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
  • More OpenText UFT Developer 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
    Top Answer:There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership.
    Top Answer:The pricing is competitive. It is affordable and average.
    Top Answer:Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars.
    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
    14th
    Views
    3,165
    Comparisons
    1,911
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    452
    Rating
    8.0
    21st
    Views
    480
    Comparisons
    336
    Reviews
    4
    Average Words per Review
    440
    Rating
    7.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
    SOAtest
    Learn More
    Parasoft
    Video Not Available
    Interactive Demo
    Overview
    With OpenText UFT Developer, you get object identification tools, parallel testing, and record/replay capabilities.

    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
    Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
    Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Manufacturing Company12%
    Comms Service Provider12%
    Computer Software Company12%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm22%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Energy/Utilities Company7%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    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 Business5%
    Midsize Enterprise24%
    Large Enterprise71%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise76%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise69%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise75%
    Buyer's Guide
    OpenText UFT Developer vs. Parasoft SOAtest
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT Developer vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 14th in Test Automation Tools with 34 reviews while Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 21st in Test Automation Tools with 30 reviews. OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4, while Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, froglogic Squish and Original Software TestDrive, whereas Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Tricentis Tosca. See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. Parasoft SOAtest report.

    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.