CrossBrowserTesting vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

SmartBear and Parasoft are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. SmartBear is ranked #28, while Parasoft is ranked #16 with an average rating of 9.0. SmartBear holds a 1.0% mindshare in FT, compared to Parasoft’s 0.9% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of SmartBear users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of Parasoft users who would recommend it.

CrossBrowserTesting

Read 19 CrossBrowserTesting reviews

550 Views
495 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Parasoft SOAtest

Read 32 Parasoft SOAtest reviews

1,896 Views
493 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

CrossBrowserTesting

Parasoft SOAtest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Parasoft SOAtest and CrossBrowserTesting compete in software testing. Parasoft SOAtest has a stronger appeal due to its comprehensive testing capabilities, while CrossBrowserTesting is preferred for its extensive cross-browser coverage.

Features: Parasoft SOAtest offers automated API testing, providing deep analysis and security testing abilities. It supports multiple languages and protocols including JSON, allowing for customizable scripting and data-driven testing. CrossBrowserTesting excels in cross-browser testing functionality and provides real devices for testing alongside capabilities like live testing and screenshots.

Room for Improvement: Parasoft SOAtest could enhance user interface design, simplify integration with other tools, and offer more competitive pricing. CrossBrowserTesting could improve the speed of starting new sessions, expand device selection, and provide more comprehensive support for mobile testing environments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Parasoft SOAtest has a structured deployment process with dedicated customer support channels. CrossBrowserTesting offers flexible cloud-based deployment, providing more accessibility for diverse teams.

Pricing and ROI: Parasoft SOAtest involves a higher initial setup cost but offers substantial ROI in API-focused scenarios. CrossBrowserTesting offers a cost-effective entry point with a high ROI through efficient cross-browser coverage.

To learn more, read our detailed CrossBrowserTesting vs. Parasoft SOAtest Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting vs. Parasoft SOAtest

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 869,202 peers since 2012

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

CrossBrowserTesting

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

28th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Parasoft SOAtest

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

16th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (21st), API Testing Tools (9th), Test Automation Tools (15th)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.0%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.9%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Parasoft SOAtest	0.9%
CrossBrowserTesting	1.0%
Other	98.1%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

CharlesNetshivhera

Senior DevOps Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

Knowledgeable support, scalable, and stable

We use CrossBrowserTesting for testing our web-based applications We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve. I have used CrossBrowserTesting within the past 12 months. CrossBrowserTesting is stable. I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable.…

Read full review

Nghiêm Phương

CEO at SMOne

Quality and security improvements drive user satisfaction

We have many customers, but with Parasoft SOAtest, we just focus on .NET, Java, and PHP protocols and message formats. For deployment, it runs on-premise with Parasoft SOAtest. The transition from manual testing can be challenging, and it's the first time they're using automation testing with Parasoft SOAtest. For the tool itself, Parasoft SOAtest, I would rate it as great with an overall rating of 10 out of 10.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."

"Each new session started with the live testing feature allows for a cleared browser and new experience to be able to not only see these attributes on the page clearly but also pass clean data."

"SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."

"Record and Replay is the most used functionality for us, as we can record the test cases and play them on multiple combinations of platforms."

"The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues."

"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."

"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."

"With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes."

More CrossBrowserTesting pros

"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."

"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."

"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."

"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."

"The solution is scalable."

"One of the most valuable features I found in Parasoft SOAtest is its ability to extend the product."

"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."

"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."

More Parasoft SOAtest pros

Cons

"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."

"Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."

"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."

"Sometimes the testing is slow."

"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."

"A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."

"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."

"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."

More CrossBrowserTesting cons

"The performance could be a bit better."

"Reporting facilities can be better."

"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."

"UI testing should be more in-depth."

"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."

"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."

More Parasoft SOAtest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."

"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."

"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."

"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."

"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."

"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%."

"They do have a confusing licensing structure."

"I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses."

"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."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

869,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

20%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Computer Software Company

11%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	10

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	22

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Parasoft SOAtest?

Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Parasoft SOAtest?

In terms of improvements for Parasoft SOAtest, some features could be added or perhaps existing areas could be improved, such as lowering prices.

See all answers

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 73% of the time

Sauce Labs vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 14% of the time

Eggplant Test vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 14% of the time

More CrossBrowserTesting Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 19% of the time

Postman Enterprise vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 19% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 11% of the time

Coverity Static vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 10% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 7% of the time

More Parasoft SOAtest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting

October 2025

Download CrossBrowserTesting product report

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft SOAtest

September 2025

Download Parasoft SOAtest product report

Also Known As

No data available

SOAtest

Overview

CrossBrowserTesting is a cloud testing platform that gives instant access to 1500+ different real desktop and mobile browsers for testers, developers, and designers.

Native debugging tools make manual testing easy to inspect and correct HTML, CSS, and JavaScript errors on any browser.
Take automated screenshots across multiple browsers at once, then compare side-by-side against historical test runs.

SmartBear

Parasoft SOAtest delivers fully integrated API and web service testing capabilities that automate end-to-end functional API testing. Streamline automated testing with advanced codeless test creation for applications with multiple interfaces (REST & SOAP APIs, microservices, databases, and more).

SOAtest reduces the risk of security breaches and performance outages by transforming functional testing artifacts into security and load equivalents. Such reuse, along with continuous monitoring of APIs for change, allows faster and more efficient testing.

Parasoft

Sample Customers

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia

Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting vs. Parasoft SOAtest

September 2025

Free Report: CrossBrowserTesting vs. Parasoft SOAtest

Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

869,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CrossBrowserTesting vs. Parasoft SOAtest report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.