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."Integrates well with other products."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."
"The most valuable feature for me is the number of protocols that can be tested. It not only tests Web, but also SAP, Siebel, .Net, and even pdf."
"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."
"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
"It is a product that can meet regulations of the banking industry."
"One of the important features, which speeds up the automation testing development with LeanFT, is its object repository functions. Object identification are the most time-consuming aspect of building automation tests. LeanFT gives that out of the box. It helps you identify the objects and after that, once you got the object in place, then it's just about building the test scripts. So it reduces your development time significantly."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"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."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"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."
"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."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"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."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"The pricing could be improved."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"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."
"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."
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 SmartBear TestComplete, whereas Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Katalon Studio. 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.
