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

Coverity Static vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 21, 2025

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 Static
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Parasoft SOAtest
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
20th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (16th), API Testing Tools (10th), Test Automation Tools (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity Static is 4.7%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Coverity Static4.7%
Parasoft SOAtest0.7%
Other94.6%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

KT
Software Engineering Manager at Visteon Corporation
Using tools for compliance is beneficial but cost concerns persist
We have been using Coverity for quite a long period. It has been fine for our needs. I would rate Coverity between eight to nine, though the cost is high. I would rate their support from Coverity as six. That is the main complaint, but we still appreciate having it.
reviewer2772063 - PeerSpot reviewer
Quality Specialist 2A at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Has reduced manual testing effort with customization options but occasionally crashes during complex executions
One improvement would be to integrate it with modern technologies such as AI, so we can generate test cases by providing the details so that it can generate the structure, and later the person working can modify and enhance it. We can add more customized tools, and reporting can be enhanced. Currently, the reporting part is at a step level, and it does not give details for a particular test case, so improvements in those areas would be beneficial. There are performance issues where the tool crashes sometimes. In particular use cases with numerous steps, it experiences crashes. I have encountered stability and performance issues with it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution has improved our code quality and security very well."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is its interprocedural analysis, which is advantageous because it compares favorably with other tools in terms of security and code analysis."
"In my opinion, the most effective Coverity feature for identifying critical vulnerabilities is the extra checks, which offers deep analysis."
"This solution is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is that there were not a whole lot of false positives, at least on the codebases that I looked at."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."
"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 solution is scalable."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"Technical support is helpful."
 

Cons

"Coverity is not a user-friendly product."
"The price is a concern, and there are a lot of false positives coming through."
"The product should include more customization options. The analytics is not as deep as compared to SonarQube."
"I would like to see integration with popular IDEs, such as Eclipse."
"Its price can be improved. Price is always an issue with Synopsys."
"It should be easier to specify your own validation routines and sanitation routines."
"Right now, the Coverity executable is around 1.2GB to download. If they can reduce it to approximately 600 or 700MB, that would be great. If they decrease the executable, it will be much easier to work in an environment like Docker."
"Zero-day vulnerability identification can be an add-on feature that Coverity can provide."
"There are performance issues where the tool crashes sometimes. In particular use cases with numerous steps, it experiences crashes."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"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."
"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."
"In terms of improvements for Parasoft SOAtest, some features could be added or perhaps existing areas could be improved, such as lowering prices."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."
"Coverity is very expensive."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"Coverity’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."
"Coverity is quite expensive."
"The solution is affordable."
"I would rate Coverity's pricing as a nine out of ten. It's already very expensive, and it's a problem for us to get more licenses due to the price. The pricing model has some good aspects - for example, a personal license gives access to all languages without code limitations, which is better than some competitors. However, it's still a lot of money for us to spend."
"The price is around $5,000 USD."
"From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn't the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer."
"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."
"The license price is a little expensive, but it provides a better outcome in terms of the end-to-end automation process."
"I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses."
"They do have a confusing licensing structure."
"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
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
881,078 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
32%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Healthcare Company
4%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise23
 

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...
What do you like most about Coverity?
The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Parasoft SOAtest?
I am not involved in the pricing aspect, setup cost, or licensing cost of Parasoft SOAtest. Our dedicated tools and support teams handle those aspects.
What needs improvement with Parasoft SOAtest?
One improvement would be to integrate it with modern technologies such as AI, so we can generate test cases by providing the details so that it can generate the structure, and later the person work...
What is your primary use case for Parasoft SOAtest?
We use Parasoft SOAtest for API testing and service virtualization with responder setup. Service virtualization is very helpful in our testing. When any downstream system is not available or we are...
 

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis
SOAtest
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space
Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity Static vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,078 professionals have used our research since 2012.