We performed a comparison between Fortify WebInspect and Parasoft SOAtest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about HCLTech, OpenText, Rapid7 and others in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)."The accuracy of its scans is great."
"The solution's technical support was very helpful."
"There are lots of small settings and tools, like an HTTP editor, that are very useful."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"When we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities. Comparison is easy in SSC."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."
"Reporting, centralized dashboard, and bird's eye view of all vulnerabilities are the most valuable features."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"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."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"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."
"The solution is scalable."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"Fortify WebInspect could improve user-friendliness. Additionally, it is very bulky to use."
"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."
"Not sufficiently compatible with some of our systems."
"We have had a problem with authentification."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"We have often encountered scanning errors."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"The scanner could be better."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"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."
"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."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
Fortify WebInspect is ranked 2nd in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) with 17 reviews while Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 23rd in Functional Testing Tools with 30 reviews. Fortify WebInspect is rated 7.0, while Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortify WebInspect writes "A powerful tool catering to multiple use cases that provides reasonably good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". Fortify WebInspect is most compared with PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Fortify on Demand, Acunetix, OWASP Zap and HCL AppScan, whereas Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Klocwork.
We monitor all Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) 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.