No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Coverity Static vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Coverity Static
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Parasoft SOAtest
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
23rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (12th), API Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity Static is 2.5%, down from 6.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Coverity Static2.5%
Parasoft SOAtest0.8%
Other96.7%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

SP
Lead Information Security at GEP Worldwide at ReBIT
Helps us identify security vulnerabilities in the development phase and provides a plugin for the developer IDE
The initial setup is good. When I use the product to scan the code in the DevOps pipeline, the issue coverage can be greater, which can help speed up risk identification in the CI/CD pipeline. That is one area where improvement can be made. Corresponding steps can be taken for that. It integrates with most of the tools, like ticketing tools, configuration tools, Jenkins, and the pipeline. That is fantastic.
reviewer2772063 - PeerSpot reviewer
Quality Specialist 2A at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Has reduced manual testing effort with customization options but occasionally crashes during complex executions
One improvement would be to integrate it with modern technologies such as AI, so we can generate test cases by providing the details so that it can generate the structure, and later the person working can modify and enhance it. We can add more customized tools, and reporting can be enhanced. Currently, the reporting part is at a step level, and it does not give details for a particular test case, so improvements in those areas would be beneficial. There are performance issues where the tool crashes sometimes. In particular use cases with numerous steps, it experiences crashes. I have encountered stability and performance issues with it.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I encountered a bug with Coverity, and I opened a ticket. Support provided me with a workaround. So it's working at the moment, or at least it seems to be."
"Ease of development teams to adopt."
"Coverity gives advisory and deviation features, which are some of the parts I liked."
"The ability to scan code gives us details of existing and potential vulnerabilities. What really matters for us is to ensure that we are able to catch vulnerabilities ahead of time."
"It has the lowest false positives."
"The tool as it is can be used for code quality improvement."
"This product has definitely helped our organization, and based on what I have heard from the development team, they have found a lot of issues before code goes into production."
"What I find most effective about Coverity is its low rate of false positives. I've seen other platforms with many false positives, but with Coverity, most vulnerabilities it identifies are genuine. This allows me to focus on real issues."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"Technical support is helpful."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"One of the most valuable features I found in Parasoft SOAtest is its ability to extend the product."
"In general, this is a hassle free, user friendly tool and it doesn't require much knowledge if you're using the manual testing."
"SOATest provided a platform for automated testing and creating an enriched automated regression suite."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"Coverity is not stable."
"Some features are not performing well, like duplicate detection and switch case situations."
"There should be additional IDE support."
"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."
"Coverity is not a user-friendly product."
"I am not a fan of using both SOAP and REST APIs and Coverity offers a mix of functionality depending on the interface used."
"There is an extra step in my organization that involves uploading to servers, which adds overhead."
"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"One area that could use improvement is the cryptography capabilities in Parasoft SOAtest. It did not support enough of the protocols or cryptography formats we needed, which led us to create our own solutions."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"There are performance issues where the tool crashes sometimes. In particular use cases with numerous steps, it experiences crashes."
"Sadly, almost everything needs improving."
"WorkSpace is getting corrupted very often."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"The features of SOAtest used for testing (web) applications on user interface level suffice for very basic web applications, but there are better tools on the market."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"The price is competitive with other solutions."
"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."
"I would rate Coverity's pricing as a nine out of ten. It's already very expensive, and it's a problem for us to get more licenses due to the price. The pricing model has some good aspects - for example, a personal license gives access to all languages without code limitations, which is better than some competitors. However, it's still a lot of money for us to spend."
"Coverity is quite expensive."
"Coverity’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."
"Offers varying prices for different companies"
"This is a pretty expensive solution. The overall value of the solution could be improved if the price was reduced. Licensing is done on an annual basis."
"The price is around $5,000 USD."
"It is an expensive product, so think carefully about whether it fits your purposes and is the right tool for you."
"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."
"From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn't the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer."
"They do have a confusing licensing structure."
"I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses."
"The license price is a little expensive, but it provides a better outcome in terms of the end-to-end automation process."
"We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
913,076 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
27%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
5%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise23
 

Questions from the Community

How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?
We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...
What needs improvement with Coverity?
The price is a concern, and there are a lot of false positives coming through. Support with Coverity is adequate, but they take a longer time to respond. The core support is not straightforward, an...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Parasoft SOAtest?
I am not involved in the pricing aspect, setup cost, or licensing cost of Parasoft SOAtest. Our dedicated tools and support teams handle those aspects.
What needs improvement with Parasoft SOAtest?
One improvement would be to integrate it with modern technologies such as AI, so we can generate test cases by providing the details so that it can generate the structure, and later the person work...
What is your primary use case for Parasoft SOAtest?
We use Parasoft SOAtest for API testing and service virtualization with responder setup. Service virtualization is very helpful in our testing. When any downstream system is not available or we are...
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
SOAtest
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity Static vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,076 professionals have used our research since 2012.