No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Coverity Static vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 2026

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)
5th
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 (14th), API Testing Tools (9th), Test Automation Tools (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity Static is 3.0%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Coverity Static3.0%
Parasoft SOAtest0.8%
Other96.2%
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

"This product has definitely helped our organization, and based on what I have heard from the development team, they have found a lot of issues before code goes into production."
"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."
"It help us identify the latest security vulnerabilities."
"The solution has helped to increase staff productivity and improved our work significantly by approximately 20 percent."
"What I find most effective about Coverity is its low rate of false positives. I've seen other platforms with many false positives, but with Coverity, most vulnerabilities it identifies are genuine. This allows me to focus on real issues."
"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."
"If you have enough budget, it is one of the best solutions right now."
"It provides reports about a lot of potential defects."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"It totally gives control to the end user to play with data and deploy the changes directly and that reflects in the application."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"It provides easy handling of RESTful APIs and figuring out exact API scalability, responses, and failed APIs, returning code captured by the fault injections."
"Customer Service: ExcellentTechnical Support: Very Good"
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"One key feature of using SOAtest tool is that it provided us early entry in testing cycle without any services."
 

Cons

"The product lacks sufficient customization options."
"The solution needs to improve its false positives."
"The setup takes very long."
"The tool needs to improve its reporting."
"The reporting tool integration process is sometimes slow."
"Coverity is too costly, which is why we are trying other tools."
"We'd like it to be faster."
"Coverity is far from perfection, and I'm not 100 percent sure it's helping me find what I need to find in my role. We need exactly what we are looking for, i.e. security errors and vulnerabilities. It doesn't seem to be reporting while we are changing our code."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"In general, its user-friendliness needs a little improvement since there are a few bugs that still remain."
"Work file [tst] gradually increases in size due to saving or updates of workspace. I can see a major improvement in that."
"The features of SOAtest used for testing (web) applications on user interface level suffice for very basic web applications, but there are better tools on the market."
"There are performance issues where the tool crashes sometimes. In particular use cases with numerous steps, it experiences crashes."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"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."
"The platform can become unstable as the memory usage increases."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is affordable."
"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"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."
"Offers varying prices for different companies"
"The price is competitive with other solutions."
"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."
"Coverity’s price is on the higher side. It should be lower."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."
"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."
"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%."
"I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses."
"From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn't the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer."
"The license price is a little expensive, but it provides a better outcome in terms of the end-to-end automation process."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
896,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
30%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
4%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
7%
Healthcare Company
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 needs improvement with Coverity?
The price is a concern, and there are a lot of false positives coming through. Support with Coverity is adequate, but they take a longer time to respond. The core support is not straightforward, an...
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: April 2026.
896,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.