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 #19 with an average rating of 9.0. SmartBear holds a 0.9% mindshare in FT, compared to Parasoft’s 0.8% 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

529 Views
476 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Parasoft SOAtest

Read 32 Parasoft SOAtest reviews

1,955 Views
489 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: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting vs. Parasoft SOAtest

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 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

19th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (19th), API Testing Tools (10th), Test Automation Tools (16th)

Mindshare comparison

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

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

"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."

"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."

"Video recording of the script running in a cloud server."

"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 choose from many devices is the best feature."

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

"The support team is top-notch. I have a great relationship with them. They are extremely honest and responsive."

"The extensive range of products available to simulate is something I have come to appreciate as it has resulted in an ability to broaden the scope of our tests."

More CrossBrowserTesting pros

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

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

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

"Technical support is helpful."

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

"We have seen a return on investment."

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

"We can automate our scenarios in a data driven format, which shows there is no rework on scripts. We only need to update the test data and run for a number of scenarios."

More Parasoft SOAtest pros

Cons

"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."

"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."

"Sometimes the testing is slow."

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

"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."

"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."

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

"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."

More CrossBrowserTesting cons

"During the process of working with SOAtest and building test cases, the .TST files will grow. A negative side effect is that saving your changes takes more time."

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

"Reporting facilities can be better."

"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."

"The performance could be a bit better."

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

"UI testing should be more in-depth."

"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."

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."

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."

"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."

"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%."

"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."

"The license price is a little expensive, but it provides a better outcome in terms of the end-to-end automation process."

"It is an expensive product, so think carefully about whether it fits your purposes and is the right tool for you."

"They do have a confusing licensing structure."

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

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

21%

Manufacturing Company

17%

Computer Software Company

10%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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 63% of the time

Sauce Labs vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 14% of the time

Bitbar vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 12% of the time

Eggplant Test vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 12% of the time

More CrossBrowserTesting Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 21% of the time

Postman Enterprise vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 20% of the time

Coverity vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 12% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 11% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 8% of the time

More Parasoft SOAtest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting

August 2025

Download CrossBrowserTesting product report

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft SOAtest

August 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

July 2025

Free Report: CrossBrowserTesting vs. Parasoft SOAtest

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 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.