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

IBM Engineering Test Management vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
8.2
IBM Engineering Test Management improves efficiency, reduces defects, integrates well with IBM software, enhancing workflow and providing cost savings.
Sentiment score
6.3
Parasoft SOAtest streamlines web services and API test automation, offering high ROI and efficiency despite missing testing metrics.
We found Parasoft SOAtest to be quick in building up test patterns, allowing us to create complex tests efficiently.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.1
IBM Engineering Test Management's customer support is praised for responsiveness and effectiveness, with improvements in response times and satisfactory experiences.
Sentiment score
7.8
Parasoft SOAtest is praised for responsive, knowledgeable customer service, though minor delays occur in complex, regional communication issues.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
IBM Engineering Test Management scales smoothly for large organizations with thousands of users and test cases, including automated ones.
Sentiment score
6.9
Parasoft SOAtest scales well but requires improvements for memory and performance in large or cloud-based test scenarios.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.9
IBM Engineering Test Management is reliable and stable, with good performance but occasionally impacted by server configuration and database space issues.
Sentiment score
7.2
Parasoft SOAtest is generally stable, though Eclipse-based memory demands may affect less powerful systems; support is efficient.
 

Room For Improvement

IBM Engineering Test Management requires a user-friendly interface, enhanced usability, data handling, hierarchical structuring, and seamless integration with automated pipelines.
Parasoft SOAtest needs UI improvements, better tool integration, more documentation, and offers limited WebUI testing with high costs.
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

<p>IBM Engineering Test Management provides robust features and customization with flexible pricing, ideal for large enterprises needing comprehensive test management.</p>
Parasoft SOAtest offers powerful features and long-term benefits despite a complex, costly pricing model requiring careful planning and support.
Parasoft SOAtest is expensive, but it was acquired because the company was dissatisfied with Quick Test Pro.
 

Valuable Features

IBM Engineering Test Management is praised for fast, reliable customizable workflows, and robust integrations, particularly in testing and tracking functionality.
Parasoft SOAtest enhances functional testing with extensive protocol support, automation, and versatile scripting for efficient webservice and API testing.
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

IBM Engineering Test Manage...
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (15th), Load Testing Tools (18th)
Parasoft SOAtest
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (19th), Functional Testing Tools (19th), API Testing Tools (10th), Test Automation Tools (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. IBM Engineering Test Management is designed for Test Management Tools and holds a mindshare of 2.4%, down 2.7% compared to last year.
Parasoft SOAtest, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 0.8% mindshare, up 0.7% since last year.
Test Management Tools
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Scalable and Stable solution with good integration function and support team
IBM Rational has the RFT, which is rational functional testing. We do test automation with rational functional testing. So after we do that, we can put in all the code, then I can build it, then put all the test cases, and put all the build code for the shared location. And then rational that shared location means that RQM has access to the shared location. So, when we execute, if a test case is automated, we can run it from RQM. We need to have the environment ready for it to execute. Once we have that, then we can select the task case. So, by clicking on one button, the other environment is automatically plugged in. Then test results will be automatically transferred back to our RQM. So, in RQM, we can view it, and it is integrated. So we can run the test and the automation from RQM, and the test results will come back. Azure DevOps first test case is there, but then we tried to use Selenium to do half automation. Still, we realized that it wouldn't have the integration. We could do something in the pipeline, but it fires the Selenium test automation code. But then the test results won't be brought back or added to AzureDesk DevOps. That's something that I do hope that there can be another other system that can have this kind of integration. RQM can be improved because it's not related to our server and could be faster. We need to find out how much database storage is needed and keep increasing it. We heard that the latest version of RQM can clean up some old ones and give the same test result. But that one feature we are yet to use. It's a setting that we can set up, and then it goes automatically or gives me the choice to do it manually.
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 Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
25%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
6%
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

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.
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

IBM Rational Quality Manager, Rational Quality Manager
SOAtest
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ehrhardt, Cisco Systems, Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik, CareCore National, ItaÒ BBA, Barr
Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Tricentis and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: August 2025.
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.