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

Parasoft SOAtest vs Polyspace Code Prover comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Parasoft SOAtest
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (28th), Functional Testing Tools (20th), API Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (21st)
Polyspace Code Prover
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (19th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Parasoft SOAtest and Polyspace Code Prover aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Parasoft SOAtest is designed for Functional Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 0.7%, up 0.7% compared to last year.
Polyspace Code Prover, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 1.2% mindshare, up 0.8% since last year.
Functional Testing Tools
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Pradeep Panchakarla - PeerSpot reviewer
A reliable solution that provides excellent features and detects memory corruption
The run time analysis process must be improved. If we do not run with the main loop, it generates its own main and doesn’t allow developers to modify the execution sequences. The solution must provide more flexibility to the developers to manipulate the runtime analysis tools. The developer must be allowed to modify the main sequence. It will be very easy for them to test their use cases. Otherwise, Polyspace generates a random main file and executes all the functions randomly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"The solution is scalable."
"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."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"Technical support is helpful."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"One of the most valuable features I found in Parasoft SOAtest is its ability to extend the product."
"The outputs are very reliable."
"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."
 

Cons

"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"Enabling/disabling an optional element of an XML request is only possible if a data source (e.g., Excel sheet) is connected to the test. Otherwise, the option is not available at all in the drop-down menu."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"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."
"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 product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"The tool has some stability issues."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
 

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 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."
"From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn't the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer."
"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."
"I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses."
"They do have a confusing licensing structure."
"We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%."
"We use the paid version."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
24%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
5%
Manufacturing Company
39%
Computer Software Company
12%
Transportation Company
4%
Government
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Parasoft SOAtest?
Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Parasoft SOAtest?
Parasoft SOAtest is expensive, but it was acquired because the company was dissatisfied with Quick Test Pro. The new management does not want subscription tools around, aiming for scripted tests us...
What needs improvement with Parasoft SOAtest?
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 ow...
What do you like most about Polyspace Code Prover?
When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts,...
What needs improvement with Polyspace Code Prover?
I'm still trying to use constraints with range propagation, but I can't get it to work properly, and I haven't found any documentation. It require support. There could be an issue with range propag...
 

Also Known As

SOAtest
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: April 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.