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

GitGuardian Platform vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 28, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.9
GitGuardian Platform saves time and resources by automating vulnerability detection, reducing costs, and enhancing security efficiency.
Sentiment score
6.3
Parasoft SOAtest streamlines web services and API test automation, offering high ROI and efficiency despite missing testing metrics.
I can certainly say that we have saved significant time and resources in terms of people and automation.
The majority of our incidents for critical detectors and important secret types are remediated automatically or proactively by developers through GitGuardian's notification system, without security team involvement.
We found Parasoft SOAtest to be quick in building up test patterns, allowing us to create complex tests efficiently.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.7
GitGuardian's customer service is praised for responsiveness, knowledgeable support, proactive communication, and high user satisfaction ratings.
Sentiment score
7.8
Parasoft SOAtest is praised for responsive, knowledgeable customer service, though minor delays occur in complex, regional communication issues.
It effectively helps us with credentials security and has been performing satisfactorily.
I would rate their technical support a nine out of ten.
I would rate the technical support as excellent.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
GitGuardian Platform scales well across large codebases and integrates seamlessly, praised for responsive monitoring and customizable deployments.
Sentiment score
6.9
Parasoft SOAtest scales well but requires improvements for memory and performance in large or cloud-based test scenarios.
In terms of scalability, I would rate it around a ten out of ten, as it handles all the repositories and commit activity we have.
I would rate it a ten out of ten for scalability.
Currently, what GitGuardian Platform is doing works effectively.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.4
Users regard GitGuardian as stable and reliable, experiencing minimal downtime and quick resolutions for occasional configuration issues.
Sentiment score
7.2
Parasoft SOAtest is generally stable, though Eclipse-based memory demands may affect less powerful systems; support is efficient.
We set up a lot of the repository, so GitGuardian is a required check.
The SaaS platform has experienced two significant moments of downtime or instability in the last six months, requiring notices and retrospectives.
I would rate the stability of the GitGuardian Platform as excellent with no downtimes.
 

Room For Improvement

GitGuardian Platform requires customization, better integrations, advanced analytics, improved UI, mobile apps, and enhanced user management for efficiency.
Parasoft SOAtest needs UI improvements, better tool integration, more documentation, and offers limited WebUI testing with high costs.
Another thing that would be good to see is some more metrics on the usage of the GitGuardian pre-push hooks.
The self-healing activity by developers isn't reflected in the analytics, requiring us to collect this data ourselves.
We are looking for better metrics and audit data, wanting more features such as knowing which users are creating the most secrets or committing the most secrets, what repository, what directory, and who is not checking in secrets.
It did not support enough of the protocols or cryptography formats we needed, which led us to create our own solutions.
In terms of improvements for Parasoft SOAtest, some features could be added or perhaps existing areas could be improved, such as lowering prices.
 

Setup Cost

GitGuardian offers value with a free plan for small teams but may be costly for large organizations.
Parasoft SOAtest offers powerful features and long-term benefits despite a complex, costly pricing model requiring careful planning and support.
Overall, the secret detection sector is expensive, but we are happy with the value we get.
It's fairly priced, as it performs a lot of analysis and is a valuable tool.
Parasoft SOAtest is expensive, but it was acquired because the company was dissatisfied with Quick Test Pro.
 

Valuable Features

GitGuardian excels in fast, accurate secret detection with seamless integration, low false positives, and efficient remediation features.
Parasoft SOAtest enhances functional testing with extensive protocol support, automation, and versatile scripting for efficient webservice and API testing.
One of the best features of the solution is the ability to use pre-push hooks.
A high number of our exposures are remediated by developers before security needs to step in, as the self-healing playbook process engages them automatically.
GitGuardian Platform performs the capability to detect secrets in real time exceptionally, as it activates from the commit and can detect it immediately.
Parasoft SOAtest is very good at ensuring tests don't pass or fail until they genuinely pass or fail.
Parasoft SOAtest improves the quality of the application, increases security and security compliance, and it is a cost-effective tool.
 

Categories and Ranking

GitGuardian Platform
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (8th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (6th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (6th), Software Supply Chain Security (4th), DevSecOps (3rd), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (4th)
Parasoft SOAtest
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
19th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (19th), API Testing Tools (10th), Test Automation Tools (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of GitGuardian Platform is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Ney Roman - PeerSpot reviewer
Facilitates efficient secret management and improves development processes
Regarding the exceptions in GitGuardian Platform, we know that within the platform we have a way to accept a path or a directory from a repository, but it is not that visible at the very beginning. You have to figure out where to search for it, and once you have it, it is really good, but it is not that visible at the beginning. This should be made more exposed. The documentation could be better because it was not that comprehensively documented. When we started working with GitGuardian Platform, it was difficult to find some specific use cases, and we were not aware of that. It might have improved now, but at that time, it was not something we would recommend.
Nghiêm Phương - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
18%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
10%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?
It's also worth mentioning that GitGuardian is unique because they have a free tier that we've been using for the first twelve months. It provides full functionality for smaller teams. We're a smal...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?
It's competitively priced compared to others. Overall, the secret detection sector is expensive, but we are happy with the value we get.
What needs improvement with GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?
GitGuardian Platform does what it is designed to do, but it still generates many false positives. We utilize the automated playbooks from GitGuardian Platform, and we are enhancing them. We will pr...
What do you like most about Parasoft SOAtest?
Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports.
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...
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.
 

Also Known As

GitGuardian Internal Monitoring, GitGuardian Public Monitoring
SOAtest
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Widely adopted by developer communities, GitGuardian is used by over 600 thousand developers and leading companies, including Snowflake, Orange, Iress, Mirantis, Maven Wave, ING, BASF, and Bouygues Telecom.
Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
Find out what your peers are saying about GitGuardian Platform vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.