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 8.5. SmartBear holds a 0.8% mindshare in FT, compared to Parasoft’s 0.7% 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
305 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Parasoft SOAtest

Read 31 Parasoft SOAtest reviews

506 Views
213 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: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting vs. Parasoft SOAtest

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 859,129 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

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (25th), API Testing Tools (10th), Test Automation Tools (18th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 0.8%, down from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.7%, 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

Milind Parab

Sr. Principal Software Engineer at Cadence Design Systems

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.

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

"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."

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

"It was the perfect solution that saved us time and money to perform web viewing tests on real devices, which allowed our team to correct multiple failures in devices."

"This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."

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

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

"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."

"I must acknowledge that the customer support has been A++ when I have run into problems."

More CrossBrowserTesting pros

"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."

"We have seen a return on investment."

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

"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."

"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."

"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."

More Parasoft SOAtest pros

Cons

"The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default."

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

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

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

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

"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."

"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."

"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."

More CrossBrowserTesting cons

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

"Reporting facilities can be better."

"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."

"The performance could be a bit better."

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

"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 own solutions."

"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."

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."

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

"We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%."

"From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn't the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer."

"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."

"The price is around $5,000 USD."

"They do have a confusing licensing structure."

"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."

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

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

22%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Real Estate/Law Firm

Government

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

11%

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?

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 71% of the time

Sauce Labs vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 17% of the time

Bitbar vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 12% of the time

More CrossBrowserTesting Competitors

Postman vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 21% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 21% of the time

Coverity vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 13% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 9% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 8% of the time

More Parasoft SOAtest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting

June 2025

Download CrossBrowserTesting product report

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft SOAtest

June 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

June 2025

Free Report: CrossBrowserTesting vs. Parasoft SOAtest

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

859,129 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.