We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One 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."The initial setup is relatively easy."
"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
"Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."
"The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner."
"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."
"The solution is easy to integrate with other platforms."
"With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files."
"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."
"Technical support is helpful."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"The solution is scalable."
"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."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact."
"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"The solution is expensive."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"The solution does not have proper scripting."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"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."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"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."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"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."
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Test Automation Tools with 89 reviews while Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 21st in Test Automation Tools with 30 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite, whereas Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Klocwork and Apache JMeter. See our OpenText UFT One vs. Parasoft SOAtest report.
See our list of best API Testing Tools vendors, 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.
