OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

The compared OpenText and Parasoft solutions aren't in the same category. OpenText is ranked #3 in DAST , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 11.0% mindshare in the category. Parasoft is ranked #16 in FT , with an average rating of 8.7, and holds a 1.9% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of Parasoft users who would recommend it.

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Read 22 OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing reviews

3,095 Views
1,145 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Parasoft SOAtest

Read 33 Parasoft SOAtest reviews

2,628 Views
867 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Parasoft SOAtest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and Parasoft SOAtest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, Checkmarx, OpenText and others in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST).

To learn more, read our detailed Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,515 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

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd), DevSecOps (9th)

Parasoft SOAtest

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (20th), Functional Testing Tools (16th), API Testing Tools (9th), Test Automation Tools (14th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is designed for Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) and holds a mindshare of 11.0%, up 9.5% compared to last year.
Parasoft SOAtest, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 1.9% mindshare, up 0.7% since last year.

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing	11.0%
Veracode	18.2%
Checkmarx One	17.0%
Other	53.8%

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Parasoft SOAtest	1.9%
Tricentis Tosca	12.9%
BrowserStack	7.5%
Other	77.7%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

ArnabPaul

Cyber Security Consultant at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Enhancements in manual testing align with reporting and integration features

WebInspect works efficiently with Java-based or .NET based applications. However, it struggles with Salesforce applications, where it requires approximately 20-24 hours to crawl and audit but produces minimal findings, necessitating manual verification. The solution offers customization features for crawling and vulnerability detection. It includes various security frameworks and allows selection of specific vulnerability types to audit, such as OWASP Top 10 or JavaScript-based vulnerabilities. When working with APIs, we can select OWASP API Top 10. The tool also supports custom audit features by combining different security frameworks. For on-premises deployment, the setup is complex, particularly regarding SQL server configuration. Unlike Burp Suite or OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, which have simpler setup processes, WebInspect requires SQL server setup to function.

Read full review

reviewer2772063

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.

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 transaction recorder within WebInspect is easy to use, which is valuable for our team."

"There are lots of small settings and tools, like an HTTP editor, that are very useful."

"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."

"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."

"It is scalable and very easy to use."

"I'm sorry, but there is no review content provided to extract a quote from."

"The solution's technical support was very helpful."

"Reporting, centralized dashboard, and bird's eye view of all vulnerabilities are the most valuable features."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing pros

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

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

"The best feature of Parasoft SOAtest is the extension tool where we can write our custom scripts, integrate with different languages, and customize as per our needs, which helps in a very positive way where things are not available beforehand; we can test with service virtualization."

"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."

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

"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."

"Parasoft SOAtest improves the quality of the application, increases security and security compliance, and it is a cost-effective tool."

More Parasoft SOAtest pros

Cons

"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."

"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."

"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."

"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."

"The scanner could be better."

"The solution needs better integration with Microsoft's Azure Cloud or an extension of Azure DevOps. In fact, it should better integrate with any cloud provider. Right now, it's quite difficult to integrate with that solution, from the cloud perspective."

"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."

"We have had a problem with authentification."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing cons

"Reporting facilities can be better."

"There are performance issues where the tool crashes sometimes. In particular use cases with numerous steps, it experiences crashes."

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

"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."

"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."

"The summary reports could be improved."

"The performance could be a bit better."

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

More Parasoft SOAtest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."

"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."

"Its price is almost similar to the price of AppScan. Both of them are very costly. Its price could be reduced because it can be very costly for unlimited IT scans, etc. I'm not sure, but it can go up to $40,000 to $50,000 or more than that."

"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."

"This solution is very expensive."

"It’s a fair price for the solution."

"The price is okay."

"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 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%."

"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."

"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 Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,515 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Government

15%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	15

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	23

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?

While I am not directly involved with licensing, I can share that our project's license for 1-9 applications costs between $15,000 to $19,000. In comparison, Burp Suite costs approximately $500 to ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Fortify WebInspect?

I am currently working with several tools. For Fortify, I use SCA and WebInspect. Apart from that, I use Burp Suite from PortSwigger. For API testing, I use Postman with Burp Suite or WebInspect fo...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Parasoft SOAtest?

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 20% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 7% of the time

OWASP Zap vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 6% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 5% of the time

Acunetix vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Competitors

Postman Enterprise vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 11% of the time

SonarQube vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 10% of the time

ReadyAPI vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 6% of the time

ReadyAPI Test vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 6% of the time

Coverity Static vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 5% of the time

More Parasoft SOAtest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

January 2026

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report

Download OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing product report

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft SOAtest

January 2026

Download Parasoft SOAtest product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect

SOAtest

Overview

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing offers robust scalability, ease of use, and high accuracy in scanning, making it a valuable tool for enterprises.

This security testing platform is known for its centralized dashboard, guided scans, and comprehensive reporting. It integrates seamlessly with tools like Fortify code scanner and supports extensive vulnerability detection and analysis, enhancing efficiency in security management. Despite its strengths, users suggest improvements in cloud integration, cost-effectiveness, and installation processes. Faster scans, reduced false positives, and improved mobile testing features are also desired.

What are the key features of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing?

Scalability: Easily adapts to changing enterprise needs.
Ease of Use: User-friendly interface with guided scans.
Comprehensive Reporting: Detailed vulnerability analysis and reporting.
Integration Capabilities: Works with Fortify code scanner and user authentication scanning.
Wide Vulnerability Detection: Identifies extensive security vulnerabilities.

What benefits should users expect from reviews?

Efficient Vulnerability Management: Streamlines security management in development environments.
Detailed Analysis: Provides in-depth insights into security issues.
Quick Setup: Easy to deploy within existing systems.
Enterprise Preference: Supports enterprise environments efficiently.

In industries like BFSI, OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is employed for performance network application testing, dynamic and static application security testing, and code checks. Security and QA teams use it in development processes to ensure application security prior to release, proving integral in both enterprise and testing environments.

OpenText

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

Aaron's

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

Buyer's Guide

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

January 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, Checkmarx, OpenText and others in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,515 professionals have used our research since 2012.

We monitor all Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) 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.