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

Apiiro vs Parasoft SOAtest 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

Apiiro
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
20th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (11th), API Security (11th), Software Supply Chain Security (8th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (12th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (4th)
Parasoft SOAtest
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
25th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (19th), API Testing Tools (10th), Test Automation Tools (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Apiiro is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Ryan-Murphy - PeerSpot reviewer
A great secrets detection feature, good visibility, and integrates well
The biggest benefit of Apiiro for us was the visibility it gave us into our GitHub organization, which we didn't have much of before. The benefit of adding Apiiro early is that it would be integrated into our pipeline from the start. Since we have had some of our software products for many years, we would have to do a lot of cleaning up before integrating Apiiro into our developer workflow. Integrating Apiiro early allows us to stay ahead of the curve on security issues and address them as they arise, rather than having a huge backlog for developers to fix. Apiiro's ability to provide visibility into the risk of our application components is great. This was a selling feature for us. Apiiro was a less mature product a little over a year ago when they were still early on in their development. However, they have made fantastic advancements over the last year, which has given us much more visibility into that sort of thing. Apiiro has helped prevent business-critical risks by making recommendations based on what it thinks is a high or critical issue. I think it does a pretty good job at that, but those recommendations still need a manual review from us. In general, if Apiiro flags a critical issue, it is usually pretty close to identifying whether it is business-critical or not. It is something we should review, even if we end up downgrading it. Apiiro raises valid concerns, and I am happy that it does.
Milind Parab - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable solution that can be used for automotive compliance and generates good reports
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 improved. Parasoft SOAtest could add code coverage, which will help us do the coverage in a single tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Apiiro's secrets detection feature has saved us several times, which we appreciate greatly."
"The workflow automation is likely the best aspect of the solution."
"One of the most valuable features I found in Parasoft SOAtest is its ability to extend the product."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"The solution is scalable."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
 

Cons

"User management is a little bit clunky."
"I would like support for our self-hosted Git server, other than GitHub, just regular Git."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"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."
"The price is around $5,000 USD."
"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%."
"It is an expensive product, so think carefully about whether it fits your purposes and is the right tool for you."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
24%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Apiiro?
Apiiro's secrets detection feature has saved us several times, which we appreciate greatly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apiiro?
My understanding is the pricing is pretty competitive.
What needs improvement with Apiiro?
Apiiro recently integrated SaaS, and we would love to see them expand on that. They provide many integrations to different products, including SaaS products such as Snyk. Ideally, Apiiro would incl...
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...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Apiiro Control Plane (ASOC), Apiiro API Security (SAST), Apiiro Open Source (SCA)
SOAtest
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Morgan Stanley, Rakuten, Jack Henry, SoFi, Colgate, Navan
Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
Find out what your peers are saying about Apiiro vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.