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

Parasoft SOAtest vs Selenium HQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.4
Parasoft SOAtest enhances API testing efficiency with minimal coding, offering high ROI and simplified complex test creation.
Sentiment score
7.7
Selenium HQ offers substantial ROI with time savings, efficiency in testing, and no licensing fees, despite initial learning investment.
We found Parasoft SOAtest to be quick in building up test patterns, allowing us to create complex tests efficiently.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.8
Customer service is effective and quick, though international communication and complex issues occasionally cause delays.
Sentiment score
6.2
Selenium HQ relies on community support and online forums for user assistance and troubleshooting rather than official services.
I have not had the need to escalate questions to Selenium HQ tech support recently, as open community support is widely available and has been sufficient for our needs.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
Parasoft SOAtest is praised for scalability, but faces challenges with large tests and cloud platforms, requiring careful design.
Sentiment score
7.5
Selenium HQ generally scales well, with successful implementations in various environments, though challenges can arise due to technical demands.
We can execute thousands of test cases weekly, and our automation coverage using Selenium HQ is approximately eighty-five percent.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
Parasoft SOAtest is generally stable with improved reliability since 9.10, and support effectively resolves occasional performance issues.
Sentiment score
7.2
Selenium HQ's stability varies, with stable use reported widely, though issues arise, especially with specific browsers and updates.
 

Room For Improvement

Parasoft SOAtest needs UI enhancements, better reporting, improved integration, and documentation, with issues in memory, robustness, and compatibility.
Selenium HQ needs better IE support, cross-browser stability, user-friendly interface, app support, and enhanced documentation for improved usability.
It did not support enough of the protocols or cryptography formats we needed, which led us to create our own solutions.
An automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.
 

Setup Cost

Parasoft SOAtest is costly but valued for its robust automation and features; organizations should evaluate its suitability.
Selenium HQ is free and appealing to enterprises, though it may incur indirect costs like maintenance and expertise.
Parasoft SOAtest is expensive, but it was acquired because the company was dissatisfied with Quick Test Pro.
 

Valuable Features

Parasoft SOAtest streamlines test scenario setup with powerful tools, enhancing customization, scalability, and automation in testing processes.
Selenium HQ is open-source, supports multiple languages, and offers cross-browser compatibility with extensive integration and scalability features.
Parasoft SOAtest is very good at ensuring tests don't pass or fail until they genuinely pass or fail.
New features in Selenium HQ make object identification easier without reliance on XPath and CSS.
 

Categories and Ranking

Parasoft SOAtest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
20th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (28th), API Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (21st)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
111
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.7%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 3.7%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing 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.
Sujata Sujata Ghadage - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation in testing processes sees improvement with multi-browser support and easier website interactions
Selenium HQ could improve by including a robust reporting framework, eliminating the need for external frameworks. The tool could simplify object identification, enabling users to generate XPaths without requiring detailed DOM understanding. Additionally, an automatic update mechanism for Selenium HQ would be beneficial, eliminating the need for manual downloads and updates of browser drivers when new versions are released.
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%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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...
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
Selenium is easy to install and mostly free, so there's no need for a license. This lack of costs makes it an attractive option.
 

Also Known As

SOAtest
SeleniumHQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about Parasoft SOAtest vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.