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)
26th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (11th), API Testing Tools (8th), Test Automation Tools (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity Static is 2.6%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Coverity Static2.6%
Parasoft SOAtest0.9%
Other96.5%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

KT
Software Engineering Manager at Visteon Corporation
Using tools for compliance is beneficial but cost concerns persist
We have been using Coverity for quite a long period. It has been fine for our needs. I would rate Coverity between eight to nine, though the cost is high. I would rate their support from Coverity as six. That is the main complaint, but we still appreciate having it.
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

"It's pretty stable. I rate the stability of Coverity nine out of ten."
"It has the lowest false positives."
"It provides reports about a lot of potential defects."
"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is the wrapper. We use the wrapper to build the C++ component, then we use the other code analysis to analyze the code to the build object, and then send back the result to the SonarQube server. Additionally, it is a powerful capabilities solution."
"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."
"Coverity is easy to set up and has a less lengthy process to find vulnerabilities."
"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."
"As a test consultant, I have been able to deliver high quality automated testing solutions to our clients using SOAtest in a quick manner."
"One key feature of using SOAtest tool is that it provided us early entry in testing cycle without any services."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"As an expert user, you can accomplish a lot with this tool."
"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 toolset is really good, I'm really impressed with it."
 

Cons

"Coverity is not stable but it is sufficient for our organization's requirements."
"My personal opinion is that the webpage of the last version of Coverity is not very easy to use."
"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."
"Zero-day vulnerability identification can be an add-on feature that Coverity can provide."
"Their technical support isn't so good. That needs improvement. They don't address the problems I bring up. It's not a priority for them."
"We're currently facing a primary challenge with automation using Coverity. Each developer has a license and can perform manual checks, and we also have a nightly build that analyzes the entire software. The main issue is that the tool can't look behind submodules in our code base, so it doesn't see changes stored there."
"Coverity is too costly, which is why we are trying other tools."
"When I put my code into Coverity for scanning, the code information of the product is in the system. The solution could be improved by providing a SBOM, a software bill of material."
"More descriptive reports are needed."
"There are performance issues where the tool crashes sometimes. In particular use cases with numerous steps, it experiences crashes."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"Sadly, almost everything needs improving."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"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."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"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

"Coverity is quite expensive."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"Coverity is very expensive."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."
"The tool was fairly priced."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"The price is competitive with other solutions."
"The solution is affordable."
"From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn't the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer."
"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."
"They do have a confusing licensing structure."
"We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
921,338 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
25%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
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: November 2026.
921,338 professionals have used our research since 2012.