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

OWASP Zap vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 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

OWASP Zap
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
11th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Parasoft SOAtest
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
28th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (20th), API Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of OWASP Zap is 4.7%, down from 5.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Amit Beniwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Simplifies vulnerability discovery and has high quality support
There are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores. Sometimes, a vulnerability initially categorized as high severity may be reduced to medium or low over time after security patches are applied. This alignment with the present severity score and CVSS score could be improved.
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

"The product helps users to scan and fix vulnerabilities in the pipeline."
"You can run it against multiple targets."
"The product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."
"The most valuable feature is scanning the URL to drill down all the different sites."
"Fuzzer and Java APIs help a lot with our custom needs."
"The interface is easy to use."
"The scalability of this product is very good."
"The HUD is a good feature that provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this 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."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
 

Cons

"Reporting format has no output, is cluttered and very long."
"I would like to see a version of “repeater” within OWASP ZAP, a tool capable of sending from one to 1000 of the same requests, but with preselected modified fields, changing from a predetermined word ​list, or manually created."
"There isn't too much information about it online."
"It would be nice to have a solid SQL injection engine built into Zap."
"I'd like to see a kind of feature where we can just track what our last vulnerability was and how it has improved or not. More reports that can have some kind of base-lining, I think that would be a good feature too. I'm not sure whether it can be achieved and implement but I think that would really help."
"There's very little documentation that comes with OWASP Zap."
"The reporting feature could be more descriptive."
"The port scanner is a little too slow.​"
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"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."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."
"The solution’s pricing is high."
"The tool is open source."
"OWASP Zap is free to use."
"It is open source, and we can scan freely."
"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."
"It's free and open, currently under the Apache 2 license. If ZAP does what you need it to do, selling a free solution is a very easy."
"The tool is open-source."
"The price is around $5,000 USD."
"We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%."
"The license price is a little expensive, but it provides a better outcome in terms of the end-to-end automation process."
"It is an expensive product, so think carefully about whether it fits your purposes and is the right tool for you."
"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."
"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."
"They do have a confusing licensing structure."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
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

Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
What do you like most about OWASP Zap?
The best feature is the Zap HUD (Heads Up Display) because the customers can use the website normally. If we scan websites with automatic scanning, and the website has a web application firewall, i...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OWASP Zap?
OWASP might be cost-effective, however, people prefer to use the free edition available as open source.
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...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SOAtest
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

1. Google 2. Microsoft 3. IBM 4. Amazon 5. Facebook 6. Twitter 7. LinkedIn 8. Netflix 9. Adobe 10. PayPal 11. Salesforce 12. Cisco 13. Oracle 14. Intel 15. HP 16. Dell 17. VMware 18. Symantec 19. McAfee 20. Citrix 21. Red Hat 22. Juniper Networks 23. SAP 24. Accenture 25. Deloitte 26. Ernst & Young 27. PwC 28. KPMG 29. Capgemini 30. Infosys 31. Wipro 32. TCS
Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.