Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

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 10.6% mindshare in the category. Parasoft is ranked #16 in FT , with an average rating of 8.7, and holds a 1.7% 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
  • 2,921 Views
  • 1,052 Comparison Views
83% willing to recommend
Parasoft SOAtest
Read 33 Parasoft SOAtest reviews
  • 2,343 Views
  • 703 Comparison Views
93% willing to recommend
 

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).

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Report (Updated: December 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
December 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 879,455 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
22
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd), DevSecOps (8th)
Parasoft SOAtest
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (20th), Functional Testing Tools (16th), API Testing Tools (10th), Test Automation Tools (15th)
 

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 10.6%, up 9.2% compared to last year.
Parasoft SOAtest, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 1.7% mindshare, up 0.7% since last year.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing10.6%
Veracode19.4%
Checkmarx One17.2%
Other52.8%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Parasoft SOAtest1.7%
Tricentis Tosca14.2%
BrowserStack8.1%
Other76.0%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

AP
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 - PeerSpot reviewer
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 user interface is ok and it is very simple to use."
"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."
"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."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"When we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities. Comparison is easy in SSC."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"The feature that has been most influential in identifying vulnerabilities is its ability to crawl the website, understand the structure, and analyze the network packets sent and received."
"The solution is easy to use."
More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing pros
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"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."
"The solution is scalable."
"Parasoft SOAtest improves the quality of the application, increases security and security compliance, and it is a cost-effective tool."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"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

"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."
"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."
"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."
"A localized version, for example, in Korean would be a big improvement to this solution."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
"We have often encountered scanning errors."
"I want to enhance automation. Currently, Fortify WebInspect can scan and find vulnerabilities, but users with specific skills need to interpret the results and understand how to address them."
More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing cons
"The summary reports could be improved."
"There are performance issues where the tool crashes sometimes. In particular use cases with numerous steps, it experiences crashes."
"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."
"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."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"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."
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."
"This solution is very expensive."
"The price is okay."
"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."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"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."
"From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn't the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer."
"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."
"I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses."
"They do have a confusing licensing structure."
report
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
879,455 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise23
 

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?
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 produ...
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?
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 work...
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 Logo
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
Compared 15% of the time
OWASP Zap vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Logo
OWASP Zap vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
Compared 7% of the time
Veracode vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Logo
Veracode vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
Compared 7% of the time
Acunetix vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Logo
Acunetix vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
Compared 7% of the time
HCL AppScan vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Logo
HCL AppScan vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
Compared 6% of the time
More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Competitors
SonarQube vs Parasoft SOAtest Logo
SonarQube vs Parasoft SOAtest
Compared 14% of the time
Postman Enterprise vs Parasoft SOAtest Logo
Postman Enterprise vs Parasoft SOAtest
Compared 13% of the time
Coverity Static vs Parasoft SOAtest Logo
Coverity Static vs Parasoft SOAtest
Compared 8% of the time
Tricentis Tosca vs Parasoft SOAtest Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs Parasoft SOAtest
Compared 8% of the time
Polyspace Code Prover vs Parasoft SOAtest Logo
Polyspace Code Prover vs Parasoft SOAtest
Compared 7% of the time
More Parasoft SOAtest Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing
December 2025
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing reportDownload OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing product report
Buyer's Guide
Parasoft SOAtest
December 2025
Parasoft SOAtest reportDownload 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)
December 2025
Download Free Report
Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, Checkmarx, OpenText and others in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). Updated: December 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
879,455 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.