OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

Why PeerSpot?

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 11.5% mindshare in the category. Parasoft is ranked #12 in FT , with an average rating of 8.7, and holds a 2.7% 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

7,208 Views
2,883 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Parasoft SOAtest

Read 33 Parasoft SOAtest reviews

6,729 Views
3,163 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: August 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

August 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 912,801 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 (11th)

Parasoft SOAtest

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (23rd), Functional Testing Tools (12th), API Testing Tools (8th), 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 11.5%, up 10.8% compared to last year.
Parasoft SOAtest, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 2.7% mindshare, up 0.9% since last year.

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing	11.5%
Checkmarx One	13.9%
Veracode	13.6%
Other	61.0%

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Parasoft SOAtest	2.7%
Tricentis Tosca	9.4%
OpenText Functional Testing	8.1%
Other	79.8%

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

"It is easy to use, and its reporting is fairly simple."

"The FPA and Audit Workbench are very helpful for me, and when we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities, with very detailed examples for each vulnerability, so it is very good for users and beginners and doesn't take a lot of time to understand the tool."

"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."

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

"The tool provides comprehensive vulnerability assessments which help ensure our deliverables are as free from vulnerabilities as possible. It has also streamlined our web application vulnerability assessments, assisting us in delivering secure applications to our clients."

"The product is a good option for enterprise-level organizations."

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

"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing pros

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

"As an expert user, you can accomplish a lot with this tool."

"We can now test as early as possible, so we are achieving better control over our components."

"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."

"The solution is scalable."

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

"It provides easy handling of RESTful APIs and figuring out exact API scalability, responses, and failed APIs, returning code captured by the fault injections."

"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."

More Parasoft SOAtest pros

Cons

"One thing I would like to see them introduce is a cloud-based platform."

"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."

"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."

"My advice to others using Fortify WebInspect is not to use it, there are better solutions in the market."

"The first time we ran the module, it was okay, however, the next time we ran it, it almost crashed."

"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."

"A localized version, for example, in Korean would be a big improvement to this solution."

"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing 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."

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

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

"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."

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

"The need to refresh 'Test Case Explorer' when adding a data source or environment file, can be improved."

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

"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."

More Parasoft SOAtest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."

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

"The price is okay."

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

"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."

"It’s a fair price for the solution."

"This solution is very expensive."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

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

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

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

912,801 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

12%

Government

11%

Outsourcing Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

18%

Construction Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

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 33% of the time

Acunetix vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 7% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 6% of the time

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 5% of the time

Invicti vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Competitors

SonarQube vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 6% of the time

ReadyAPI Test vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 5% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 5% of the time

Postman Enterprise vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 4% of the time

More Parasoft SOAtest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

August 2026

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report

Download OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing product report

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft SOAtest

August 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 is a robust tool for automating test scenarios, supporting a range of interfaces and protocols, making it ideal for comprehensive service testing. Its adaptability in complex environments provides extensive testing capabilities for UI and API automation.

Parasoft SOAtest offers a comprehensive suite of features designed for the efficient setup of functional tests, emphasizing ease in data-driven scenarios and thorough automation. Supporting key protocols like SOAP and REST, alongside UI recording, it integrates seamlessly with Jenkins and GitHub, adding service virtualization for enhanced end-to-end testing. Users benefit from its extensibility through custom scripts, allowing broad API and web service testing. However, there are challenges in user-friendliness, with the graphical interface requiring improvements. Reporting features need enhanced clarity and customization options. Limited cryptography support and documentation necessitate improvement. Performance issues and high pricing are noted drawbacks, but its use in banking and quality enhancement demonstrates significant potential.

What are the key features of Parasoft SOAtest?

Rapid functional test setup: Streamlines the creation of test scenarios efficiently.
Data-driven testing: Enables easy configuration with different datasets.
Extensive automation: Facilitates comprehensive testing for APIs and UIs.
Protocol support: Integrates SOAP, REST, JSON, SAP RFC functionalities.
Service virtualization: Enhances testing across complex system architectures.

What benefits and ROI should users expect?

Improved testing efficiency: Reduces manual testing efforts significantly.
Enhanced quality assurance: Elevates application reliability and performance.
Integration capabilities: Coordinates well with Jenkins and GitHub for streamlined processes.
Comprehensive testing: Provides thorough coverage for APIs and web services.

Implementing Parasoft SOAtest in industries like banking allows automation of regression tests for web services in SOA architectures, supporting protocols such as ISO 8583. Companies use it to transition from manual testing to automation, integrating JSON and XML, facilitating improved application quality.

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)

August 2026

Download Free Report

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

912,801 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.