Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Coverity vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

Black Duck and Parasoft are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Black Duck is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while Parasoft is ranked #28 with an average rating of 8.0. Black Duck holds a 8.0% mindshare in SAST, compared to Parasoft’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Black Duck users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of Parasoft users who would recommend it.
Coverity
Read 42 Coverity reviews
  • 11,969 Views
  • 8,281 Comparison Views
88% willing to recommend
Parasoft SOAtest
Read 30 Parasoft SOAtest reviews
  • 929 Views
  • 571 Comparison Views
92% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Parasoft SOAtest and Coverity are leading tools in software testing and code analysis. Coverity holds an upper hand due to its superior feature set despite higher costs.

Features: Parasoft SOAtest provides strong automated testing, integration support, and flexibility in handling web services. Coverity offers robust static analysis, vulnerability detection, and quality assurance for complex codebases.

Room for Improvement: Parasoft SOAtest needs better documentation, improved integration options, and a more intuitive user interface. Coverity faces challenges with high complexity, a need for streamlined workflows, and demands for enhanced user guidance.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Parasoft SOAtest is noted for its straightforward deployment process. Coverity is recognized for responsive customer support. Deployment favors Parasoft SOAtest, while support leans towards Coverity.

Pricing and ROI: Parasoft SOAtest has a competitive pricing strategy and offers swift ROI. Coverity, though more expensive, promises substantial long-term ROI attributable to its advanced features.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest Report (Updated: March 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest
March 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 845,040 peers since 2012

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
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
4th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Parasoft SOAtest
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
28th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (20th), API Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 8.0%, up from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Md. Shahriar Hussain - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers impressive reporting features with user-friendliness and high scalability
The solution can be easily setup but requires heavy integration due to the multiple types of port and programming languages involved. Comparing the resource requirements of the solution I would say it can be installed effortlessly. I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. A professional needs some pre-acquired knowledge to manage Coverity's deployment process, but the local solution partners provide support well enough for trouble-free deployment. The overall deployment process of Coverity took around two and a half hours in our organization. The deployment duration depends upon the operating system and resources including high-end RAM and CPU processors.
Read full review
Ajit Kumar Rout - PeerSpot reviewer
Good API testing and RIT feature; clarity could be improved
In general, this is a hassle free, user friendly tool and it doesn't require much knowledge if you're using the manual testing. Automated testing is also good but requires some knowledge in that field. It has some great features. It's a good tool compared to some of the other paid tools; input and output can be stored before extension and there is also a verification assessment that can be implemented by using some different methodologies inside the tool. If the licensing cost is suitable then I recommend this solution. If you have automation people with in-depth knowledge in coding that will be helpful. I rate this solution a seven out of 10.
Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We were very comfortable with the initial setup."
"It provides reports about a lot of potential defects."
"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."
"The product is easy to use."
"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."
More Coverity pros
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"The solution is scalable."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
More Parasoft SOAtest pros
 

Cons

"There should be additional IDE support."
"The tool needs to improve its reporting."
"Coverity could improve the ease of use. Sometimes things become difficult and you need to follow the guides from the website but the guides could be better."
"Coverity is not a user-friendly product."
"SCM integration is very poor in Coverity."
"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."
"Ideally, it would have a user-based license that does not have a restriction in the number of lines of code."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
More Coverity cons
"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."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"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."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
More Parasoft SOAtest cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"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 solution's pricing is comparable to other products."
"Offers varying prices for different companies"
"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."
"The solution is affordable."
More Coverity pricing and cost advice
"The price is around $5,000 USD."
"They do have a confusing licensing structure."
"It is an expensive product, so think carefully about whether it fits your purposes and is the right tool for you."
"The license price is a little expensive, but it provides a better outcome in terms of the end-to-end automation process."
"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."
"We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%."
"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
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
33%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
4%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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...
See all answers
What do you like most about Coverity?
The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?
I do not know about the pricing.
See all answers
What do you like most about Parasoft SOAtest?
Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Parasoft SOAtest?
Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings. Going through that is a challenge. It only happens in the initial stage when we are setting up the tool, but it can be imp...
See all answers
What is your primary use case for Parasoft SOAtest?
We use Parasoft SOAtest for automotive compliance and sanity-checking scores.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity Logo
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity
Compared 50% of the time
Fortify on Demand vs Coverity Logo
Fortify on Demand vs Coverity
Compared 6% of the time
Klocwork vs Coverity Logo
Klocwork vs Coverity
Compared 6% of the time
Polyspace Code Prover vs Coverity Logo
Polyspace Code Prover vs Coverity
Compared 5% of the time
GitLab vs Coverity Logo
GitLab vs Coverity
Compared 1% of the time
More Coverity Competitors
Postman vs Parasoft SOAtest Logo
Postman vs Parasoft SOAtest
Compared 22% of the time
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Parasoft SOAtest Logo
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Parasoft SOAtest
Compared 20% of the time
ReadyAPI vs Parasoft SOAtest Logo
ReadyAPI vs Parasoft SOAtest
Compared 8% of the time
Tricentis Tosca vs Parasoft SOAtest Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs Parasoft SOAtest
Compared 7% of the time
Polyspace Code Prover vs Parasoft SOAtest Logo
Polyspace Code Prover vs Parasoft SOAtest
Compared 7% of the time
More Parasoft SOAtest Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Coverity
March 2025
Coverity reportDownload Coverity product report
Buyer's Guide
Parasoft SOAtest
March 2025
Parasoft SOAtest reportDownload Parasoft SOAtest product report
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
SOAtest
 

Overview

Coverity gives you the speed, ease of use, accuracy, industry standards compliance, and scalability that you need to develop high-quality, secure applications. Coverity identifies critical software quality defects and security vulnerabilities in code as it’s written, early in the development process, when it’s least costly and easiest to fix. With the Code Sight integrated development environment (IDE) plugin, developers get accurate analysis in seconds in their IDE as they code. Precise actionable remediation advice and context-specific eLearning help your developers understand how to fix their prioritized issues quickly, without having to become security experts. 

Coverity seamlessly integrates automated security testing into your CI/CD pipelines and supports your existing development tools and workflows. Choose where and how to do your development: on-premises or in the cloud with the Polaris Software Integrity Platform (SaaS), a highly scalable, cloud-based application security platform. Coverity supports more than 20 languages and 200 frameworks and templates.

Black Duck

Parasoft SOAtest delivers fully integrated API and web service testing capabilities that automate end-to-end functional API testing. Streamline automated testing with advanced codeless test creation for applications with multiple interfaces (REST & SOAP APIs, microservices, databases, and more).

SOAtest reduces the risk of security breaches and performance outages by transforming functional testing artifacts into security and load equivalents. Such reuse, along with continuous monitoring of APIs for change, allows faster and more efficient testing.

Parasoft
 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
Buyer's Guide
Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest
March 2025
Free Report: Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest report.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.