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

OpenText Business Processing Testing vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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 Business Processin...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
39th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Parasoft SOAtest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
20th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (28th), API Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Business Processing Testing is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.7%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

it_user309363 - PeerSpot reviewer
We use UFT for the scalability and cross-technology diversity, UFT API for the web-service and database related testing, and HP BPT for the modular testing.
We can now take test automation through the entire business process -- testing web service availability before automated test packs start, sending and retrieving data via web-services and control of all web service testing in a single tool, along with the GUI testing of business processes across a multitude of platforms from java web through to AS400 green screen terminal apps. BPT allows you to manage all the test resources and artifacts inside of Quality Center, including all data and test flows, and to have a single point for reporting. To give you an example, we built a series of tests that would firstly fire off web-service calls to ensure the required services were running. We would then do data creation using a series of Excel VB functions (called by UFT through BPT), and then launch into GUI testing of complex webmethods Java web portals to take a business process through a series of screens, capture required data and test screen functionality, write all runtime data back to QC datasets, then call the data later in the BPT test to validate it across database checks using HP UFT API, build and execute SQL queries, and finally validate information for accounting purposes of data sitting on AS400 or payment databases.
Ajit Kumar Rout - PeerSpot reviewer
Good API testing and RIT feature; clarity could be improved
In general, this is a hassle free, user friendly tool and it doesn't require much knowledge if you're using the manual testing. Automated testing is also good but requires some knowledge in that field. It has some great features. It's a good tool compared to some of the other paid tools; input and output can be stored before extension and there is also a verification assessment that can be implemented by using some different methodologies inside the tool. If the licensing cost is suitable then I recommend this solution. If you have automation people with in-depth knowledge in coding that will be helpful. I rate this solution a seven out of 10.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This solution is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."
"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"One of the most valuable features I found in Parasoft SOAtest is its ability to extend the product."
"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"The solution is scalable."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
 

Cons

"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."
"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."
"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."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"One area that could use improvement is the cryptography capabilities in Parasoft SOAtest. It did not support enough of the protocols or cryptography formats we needed, which led us to create our own solutions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses."
"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."
"We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%."
"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 price is around $5,000 USD."
"The license price is a little expensive, but it provides a better outcome in terms of the end-to-end automation process."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
24%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
5%
 

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?
One area that could use improvement is the cryptography capabilities in Parasoft SOAtest. It did not support enough of the protocols or cryptography formats we needed, which led us to create our ow...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Business Process Testing, Business Process Testing, HPE Business Process Testing
SOAtest
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Migros Bank AG
Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.