OpenText Silk Test vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

OpenText and Parasoft are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #19 with an average rating of 8.0, while Parasoft is ranked #20 with an average rating of 8.0. OpenText holds a 1.0% mindshare in FT, compared to Parasoft’s 0.7% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of Parasoft users who would recommend it.

OpenText Silk Test

Read 17 OpenText Silk Test reviews

872 Views
544 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Parasoft SOAtest

Read 31 Parasoft SOAtest reviews

540 Views
336 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

OpenText Silk Test

Parasoft SOAtest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText Silk Test and Parasoft SOAtest are competing products in the domain of software testing tools. OpenText Silk Test seems to have an upper hand in pricing and flexibility, while Parasoft SOAtest benefits from its robust features.

Features: OpenText Silk Test provides comprehensive test automation for desktop, mobile, and web applications. Its recording capabilities are user-friendly, making automation accessible for non-technical users. It is also noted for its excellent browser support, facilitating seamless web testing. Parasoft SOAtest showcases strong API testing and service virtualization features, essential for complex integration environments. Its event monitoring tool helps validate backend requests efficiently, and the data-driven testing capability improves testing coverage.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Silk Test could improve by enhancing its API testing features to better match competitors and expanding support for a wider range of programming languages. Its integration capabilities with third-party tools could be more robust to match evolving industry standards. Parasoft SOAtest may benefit from simplifying its deployment process to reduce complexity, enhancing the user interface for better accessibility, and improving the speed of test executions to optimize performance.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Silk Test offers a straightforward deployment model that allows quick setup across various platforms, and its customer service is generally efficient. Parasoft SOAtest, while having a more complex deployment procedure, provides superior support and exhaustive documentation that aids in overcoming any initial challenges.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Silk Test is lauded for its competitive pricing, offering a high return on investment for projects focusing on cost efficiency. Its ability to reduce testing time and expenses makes it attractive for budget-conscious teams. Parasoft SOAtest, albeit with a higher pricing model, compensates this with its extensive feature set, promising substantial returns in environments that demand rigorous API and service testing.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Silk Test vs. Parasoft SOAtest Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Parasoft SOAtest

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 850,028 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 Silk Test

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

19th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

19th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (8th)

Parasoft SOAtest

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

20th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

21st

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (28th), API Testing Tools (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 1.0%, down from 1.3% 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

SrinivasPakala

Director Consulting Expert at Cgi Deutschland KG

Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available

While we are performance testing the engineering key, we need to come up with load strategies to commence the test. We'll help to monitor the test, and afterward, we'll help to make all the outcomes, and if they are new, we'll do lots and lots of interpretation and analysis across various servers, to look at response times, and impact. For example, whatever the observations we had during the test, we need to implement it. We'll have to help to catch what exactly is the issues were, and we'll help to see how they can be reduced. Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are. The solution needs better monitoring, especially of CPU.

Read full review

Ajit Kumar Rout

Sr Quality Assurance Engineer at Wabtec Industrial

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.

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 feature I like most is the ease of reporting."

"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."

"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."

"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."

"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."

"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."

"The statistics that are available are very good."

"Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts."

"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."

"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."

"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."

"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."

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

"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."

"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."

"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."

More Parasoft SOAtest pros

Cons

"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."

"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."

"The pricing could be improved."

"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."

"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important."

"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."

"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."

"The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."

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

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

"Parasoft SOAtest has an internal refresh function where you can refresh the software to show the changes you’ve made in your projects. Unfortunately this function does not work properly, because it often does not show the changes after you’ve hit te refresh button a few times."

"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."

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

"UI testing should be more in-depth."

"The summary reports could be improved."

"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."

More Parasoft SOAtest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our licensing fees are on a yearly basis, and while I think that the price is quite reasonable I am not allowed to share those details."

"We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."

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

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

"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 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."

"From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn't the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer."

"They do have a confusing licensing structure."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

18%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Computer Software Company

11%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Silk Test?

The pricing depends on the license used. The pricing is similar to others in the market.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Silk Test?

The pricing could be improved.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Silk Test?

The product is used for manual, functional, and performance testing. I'm using the tool for loading data into ERP systems.

See all answers

What do you like most about Parasoft SOAtest?

Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 51% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 14% of the time

Qt Squish vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 14% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 12% of the time

ReadyAPI vs OpenText Silk Test

Compared 10% of the time

More OpenText Silk Test Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 23% of the time

Postman vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 21% of the time

Coverity vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 13% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 8% of the time

ReadyAPI vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 8% of the time

More Parasoft SOAtest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test

April 2025

Download OpenText Silk Test product report

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft SOAtest

April 2025

Download Parasoft SOAtest product report

Also Known As

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test

SOAtest

Overview

SilkTest is robust and portable test automation for web, native, and enterprise software applications. Silk Test's portability enables users to test applications more effectively with lower complexity and cost in comparison to other functional testing tools on the market. Silk Test's role based testing enables business stakeholders, QA engineers, and developers to contribute to the whole automation testing process, which drives collaboration and increases the effectiveness of software testing.

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

Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies

Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Silk Test vs. Parasoft SOAtest

April 2025

Free Report: OpenText Silk Test vs. Parasoft SOAtest

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Silk Test vs. Parasoft SOAtest report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional Testing Tools 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.