Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Parasoft SOAtest vs. Worksoft Certify and other solutions. Updated: July 2020.
431,275 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic.
Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization.
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.
It's pretty seamless with SAP and Salesforce because they've built in the field definitions and all the things that you need. You literally turn it on and execute your script and it records it. It's very simple. Then you can go back and put in some of the other functions. For example, instead of hard-coding field selections, you put in a data table so you can run it multiple times or with multiple data. It was actually written to work very well with SAP.
Certify integrates with other tools and it works very well with other machine testing applications.
It does allow for good reusability. When it's designed properly and utilized properly, we can put things in a way that allows for reusability, meaning a lot of reuse of VA01, if they're very similar flows, to keep it simple.
The biggest feature is the fact that it's codeless. It takes away the problem of finding people with the correct programming language, since there are multiple such languages. It saves time in introducing people to the solution because they don't need programming knowledge, they just need to be able to think logically. This makes it vastly usable by more people who are not even acquainted with IT at all.
With autotesting, we have been able to eliminate duplication of test cases across those four areas. This has helped us knock down our number of test cases. Our test cases are also running more optimally. Therefore, it has very much helped in that sense, so we were able to eliminate a lot of test cases and get out of manual silos by running on autotesting, which is more efficient.
It is a pretty easy tool to use as far as automated testing tools go.
We are now trying to automate all our applications: SAP, web, third-party, and legacy. Instead of multiple tools, we have been able to have Worksoft handle a lot of our applications. This has saved us a lot of time and effort.
People who don't have coding knowledge are capable of doing automation with Certify. It reduces coding and scripting dependencies.
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.
With the codeless process automation across packaged applications, once in a while, if we get a weird application that's not widely used, it gets a little stickier. First, the software has to learn the fields, so you have to identify all the fields. Once you do that, as long as there isn’t any non-standard code in the application, then it works fine. But there's that one step that you have to do, a step you don't have to do with SAP and Salesforce, for example.
Better automation capability would be helpful.
Pricing is a bit high and we would like to have the availability of a trail environment for beginners and training would be great to have and easier to expand and use by more and more consultants.
An area that I would like to see improved is how the permissions are applied. If you're applying permissions groups to a user, one of the options is to delete the group entirely and lose the entire permission group, rather than just deleting the permission from the user, which seems a little silly. In my opinion, that whole module of permissions is very confusing and lends itself to common errors.
Performance on the web UI part, especially with some of the more comprehensive Fiori features, like the complex tables that are being used, could be improved. In those cases we have noticed a lot of execution-time increase with regards to the Certify solution.
It would be great if our business testers could develop their own automated test cases. With every release you do, you have to go back and touch your old test cases and bring them up to speed, or develop new test cases. In the beginning, that is a challenge because you have to have someone who is certified in the tool to help you develop these test cases.
Technical support's first response to us is usually late.
Web UI testing was difficult in the beginning, as we had a homegrown product, and we had to do the proper object naming.
Pricing and Cost Advice
They do have a confusing licensing structure.
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.
The initial investment is probably a little high. It was a little hard for me to sell, but it was a one-shot deal and that's why it's so high. All we are doing now is paying annual maintenance, which we don't have to do if we don't want upgrades, but we do.
There is a cost involved to doing it, but once you get over the initial cost, then you'll start reaping the benefits and seeing that testing is getting done more quickly and efficiently. We are still early on with it, but the expectation and what we're seeing is that we will start seeing some savings coming out on the back-end once we have this done.
The price is in line with everyone else's in the market. They are not cheaper nor more expensive than anyone else who was in our RFP.
We no longer need ten people sitting and manually testing something. We can just have one person running the entire regression automation testing suite, and this has saved us dollars.
The license cost is quite high. This might not be a consideration for a large company, but it will be for a small company. E.g., Tricentis (their competitor) offers certain exclusive use cases where a company can use it in a certain way, so this is another option that companies consider.
Automating our manual processes has saved us 70 to 80 percent in time.
We saved $1.3 million using Worksoft Certify in 2017.
Cost-wise, compared with other tools, it is a great product.
out of 47 in Functional Testing Tools
Average Words per Review
out of 47 in Functional Testing Tools
Average Words per Review
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 30% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Also Known As
|Parasoft SOAtest is widely recognized as the leading enterprise-grade solution for API testing and API integrity. Thoroughly test composite applications with robust support for REST and web services, plus an industry-leading 120+ protocols/message types.||Worksoft is a leading global provider of automation software for high-velocity business process testing and discovery. Enterprises worldwide use Worksoft intelligent automation to innovate faster, lower technology risk, reduce costs, improve quality, and deeply understand their real end-to-end business processes. Global 5000 companies across all industries choose Worksoft for high speed process discovery and functional testing of digital, web, cloud, mobile, big data, and dozens of enterprise applications, including SAP, Oracle, and Salesforce.com.|
Learn more about Parasoft SOAtest
Learn more about Worksoft Certify
|Lufthansa, Siemens, DirecTV, NZ Bank||Kraft, Reliant Energy, Richemont, Applied Materials, Siemens PLM, Mosaic, Dow Corning, ebay, IBM, Accenture, Fortis BC, US Government, Southwest Airlines|
Financial Services Firm46%
Computer Software Company38%
Comms Service Provider13%
Financial Services Firm5%
Consumer Goods Company11%
Computer Software Company44%
Comms Service Provider8%