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 #31 with an average rating of 7.0. Black Duck holds a 8.3% 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

13,201 Views
9,033 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Parasoft SOAtest

Read 30 Parasoft SOAtest reviews

955 Views
594 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

Coverity

Parasoft SOAtest

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.

To learn more, read our detailed Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 831,020 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

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Parasoft SOAtest

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

31st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (21st), API Testing Tools (9th), Test Automation Tools (23rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 8.3%, up from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.5%, down 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

Information Security Analyst at Banglalink

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

Ujjwal Gupta

Project Lead at Mphasis

Easy to use and understand with multiple types of testing on offer

It is very easy to understand. We can do a lot with it. Since this is a commercial tool, we can have more functionality in place. It covers more things like ADI and APIs, et cetera. Everything is in one place, right there, so you don't need to go anywhere. With one single tool, you have everything you need. You can even test the UI as well. The initial setup is very easy. There is nice functionality under the Service Virtualization feature. The solution is stable. Technical support is helpful. This product easily scales. Parasoft actually provides very extensive coverage. For example, in SAP applications, we have various EDIs, and integrated development. That also is supported by Parasoft. In the market, we don't have many of the tools there to test those things. It's nice to be able to with this product.

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

"This solution is easy to use."

"I like Coverity's capability to scan codes once we push it. We don't need more time to review our colleagues' codes. Its UI is pretty straightforward."

"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."

"Coverity integrates with issue-tracking systems like Jira and provides email notifications, alerts, and other features."

"The tool as it is can be used for code quality improvement."

"It provides reports about a lot of potential defects."

"It's very stable."

"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."

More Coverity pros

"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."

"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."

"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."

"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."

"Technical support is helpful."

"The solution is scalable."

"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."

"We have seen a return on investment."

More Parasoft SOAtest pros

Cons

"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."

"SCM integration is very poor in Coverity."

"There should be additional IDE support."

"Zero-day vulnerability identification can be an add-on feature that Coverity can provide."

"Reporting engine needs to be more robust."

"The setup takes very long."

"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."

"I had tried integrating the tool with Azure DevOps, but the report I got stated that my team faced many challenges."

More Coverity cons

"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."

"Reporting facilities can be better."

"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."

"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."

"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."

"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."

"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."

"UI testing should be more in-depth."

More Parasoft SOAtest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is affordable."

"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."

"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."

"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."

"The tool's price is somewhere in the middle. It's neither cheap nor expensive. I would rate the pricing a five out of ten."

"It is expensive."

"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."

More Coverity pricing and cost advice

"The license price is a little expensive, but it provides a better outcome in terms of the end-to-end automation process."

"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 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."

"We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%."

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

831,020 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

32%

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

18%

Computer Software Company

12%

Government

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Parasoft SOAtest?

The price is average. It isn't overly expensive.

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

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity

Compared 53% of the time

Klocwork vs Coverity

Compared 7% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Veracode vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

Seeker vs Coverity

Compared 1% of the time

More Coverity Competitors

Postman vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 25% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 22% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 9% of the time

ReadyAPI vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 8% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 8% of the time

More Parasoft SOAtest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Coverity

January 2025

Download Coverity product report

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft SOAtest

December 2024

Download Parasoft SOAtest product report

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis

SOAtest

Learn More

Black Duck

Parasoft

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.

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.

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

January 2025

Free Report: Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest

Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,020 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.