No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Parasoft SOAtest vs Perfecto comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 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

Parasoft SOAtest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
14th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
14th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (20th), API Testing Tools (9th)
Perfecto
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
16th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
21st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (13th), Mobile App Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 2.5%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Perfecto is 2.7%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Parasoft SOAtest2.5%
Perfecto2.7%
Other94.8%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2772063 - PeerSpot reviewer
Quality Specialist 2A at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Has reduced manual testing effort with customization options but occasionally crashes during complex executions
One improvement would be to integrate it with modern technologies such as AI, so we can generate test cases by providing the details so that it can generate the structure, and later the person working can modify and enhance it. We can add more customized tools, and reporting can be enhanced. Currently, the reporting part is at a step level, and it does not give details for a particular test case, so improvements in those areas would be beneficial. There are performance issues where the tool crashes sometimes. In particular use cases with numerous steps, it experiences crashes. I have encountered stability and performance issues with it.
Roland Castelino - PeerSpot reviewer
QA Lead at BMO Financial
Its reporting allows us to have a clear view regarding what tests have been executed
The most valuable would be their Live Stream analysis, where I can see the live analysis of all the executions on a single device or multiple devices as well as track them. The live analysis and reporting would be the single most valuable feature. We leverage Perfecto’s reporting and analytics a lot. From the CI Dashboard, it is mainly the status, which is the past, failure count, and time consumption, e.g., how much time did an average test or script take? Along with that, it provides the historical view compared to the previous result, e.g., am I a pass or fail? Also, the stack trace is very important. Whenever a pass occurs, we don't look beyond that. However, whenever a failure occurs, the stack trace information that it gives us is pretty critical for us when figuring out where failures lie. It gives a summary for the pass/fail count, total test count, the historical view, time consumption for each test as well as the total tests, and the stack rate of the failure. Perfecto's analytics are very important since we use them on a daily basis. We run our executions daily. After every execution, we pull information from the Perfecto reporting system and share that with our stakeholders. Having this information accurately reported is pretty important for us, so everybody is aware of the current status of the product. That way, we can evaluate the health of the product or environment against that which has been executed. Therefore, it helps make those real-time decisions and highlights the impact to the business. I found Perfecto to be pretty easy to use while executing against cross-platforms. The main reason is because the same script or test automation where we execute on multiple platforms has minimal changes that I need to do. Also, it is easy for me to set up an execution on one platform, then on another platform, either in parallel or one after the other. Parallel opportunities save me time. Once the execution has been completed across these different configurations, I can always check and compare, e.g., what are the differences and consistencies? We utilize Perfecto’s cloud-based lab to test across devices, browsers, and OSs. I use it occasionally for manual testing. Though, there are other team members who use it more frequently than I do. I use it mainly for executing my automated tests. We have the Perfecto lab, cloud devices, and machines. I can program my test to execute against any of those devices, which gives me more confidence in my product. I can compare and see how my product or application functionally behaves across these different devices and from a UI point of view, which helps me a lot. The device lab is extremely important to our testing operations. We rely on having multiple devices up and running all the time. Whenever we kick off an execution, there are multiple reasons why executions may get triggered: * CodeCommit * A scheduled job. * Might be on-demand by any stakeholder. We need the lab to be available, as we need devices up and running for executions to take place. Also, the devices help since they allow us to have parallel execution, and not just wait for a sequential device to become free and available. Therefore, volume is definitely key. It also gives us an opportunity to compare execution across platforms in that space. It is extremely important to you that the lab provides same-day access to new devices since we analyze that data every single day after execution. Perfecto provides their own framework called Quantum Framework. That is one option. The other option is, if I want to have my own framework, I can have a Java-based Maven project, take a Selenium library, AppiumLibrary, and REST Assured library, and utilize the open-source framework. It is easy for us to connect to Perfecto, no matter what framework we use, as long as it has these core libraries in it. I can design and structure it any way that I want. The execution will happen in Perfecto no matter what since they have support for these tools or libraries. It is pretty neat that way. We are not dependent on using just one particular framework to use Perfecto. While there are still some framework limitations, there is the opportunity to use multiple, different open-source frameworks, then pass the execution to Perfecto. We can use most frameworks, then design and craft it any way that we want, then just pass the execution to Perfecto.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"In general, this is a hassle free, user friendly tool and it doesn't require much knowledge if you're using the manual testing."
"As a test consultant, I have been able to deliver high quality automated testing solutions to our clients using SOAtest in a quick manner."
"We can now test as early as possible, so we are achieving better control over our components."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"Web services and API test automation was made simple without writing much code."
"It provides easy handling of RESTful APIs and figuring out exact API scalability, responses, and failed APIs, returning code captured by the fault injections."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"The number one feature, which if we didn't have out-of-the-box would be missed, is the fact that we have video execution. That gives us the ability to view errors or defects in the progression, from beginning to the end of the video."
"Mobile testing is the most valuable feature as it has reduced dependency on physical devices. We are located offshore and we don't have the physical devices, and shipping physical devices after every new release would be a difficult task. But with Perfecto, it is easy."
"We are continuously doing testing on different environments, devices, and platforms. It executes seamlessly on multiple devices without having any connectivity issues. It has been really helpful for us to test on cloud devices."
"Perfecto has definitely saved us on the costs and efforts of having to maintain our own virtual test environment."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is that it covers all types of devices on the market allowing you to test different versions of an operating system."
"We're working in Agile and we need results ASAP. The fact that the lab provides same-day access to new devices is extremely important to us."
"Overall, it has definitely translated to cost savings and the reason is multifold."
"The Perfecto device lab has allowed us to run tests on multiple devices at the same time and across multiple platforms as well, increasing the efficiency of our testing and saving money, time, and effort while enabling comprehensive testing and high app quality that we otherwise wouldn't be able to achieve."
 

Cons

"The need to refresh 'Test Case Explorer' when adding a data source or environment file, can be improved."
"I personally feel that 50% of Parasoft features are provided by SoapUI free of cost."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"We have good support of our solution architect of Parasoft, but sometimes they don’t know all the answers and then it’s harder to find more knowledge in technical support from US teams, which slows things down."
"In general, its user-friendliness needs a little improvement since there are a few bugs that still remain."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"The user-interface is not very lightweight or friendly, sometimes buggy and cumbersome."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"One improvement would be speed of execution. If it is an iOS native app, we have noticed that the speed is a bit slower. Perfecto might need to make some improvements in this area."
"We have had some issues with performance, which is something that should be improved."
"The monitoring features, in particular network traffic monitoring, could be improved."
"When using devices on the cloud, it lags quite a bit at times."
"There could be some improvements done on the interface. At times, there has been a bit of a struggle when finding things on the interface. A UI revamp would be a better option in future. That UI hasn't changed much in a long time, so I think they could just make it a bit better so that people could find stuff easily and intuitively."
"Going by the dashboard or analytics capabilities that Perfecto or Perforce is looking to offer in its roadmap, it will certainly help if they also cater to executing and enabling decision-making, rather than just focusing on standard testing metrics such as execution, efficiency, and defect rate. These are good metrics, but they don't necessarily enable decision-making for SLTs. Any improvements in the dashboards and reporting tools should focus on metrics or SLAs that can help with decision-making."
"When using devices on the cloud, it lags quite a bit at times. I know that these are real devices that are being projected on our laptop screens and monitors, but if the speed could be improved, that would be good."
"It is slow compared to physical device testing. The interactive speed could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses."
"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."
"They do have a confusing licensing structure."
"We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%."
"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."
"From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn't the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer."
"Although Perfecto is a good product for us to use, it is a bit expensive. It takes management a bit of work to find the appropriate funding for us to keep Perfecto. I imagine there could be some way to make it more accessible."
"Pricing is an area where Perfecto can do a little better. When we obtain additional licenses, we enter into negotiations with them."
"Perfecto's price is excellent compared to other products with similar features. It was the lowest of the three we evaluated. We also established a partnership with Perfecto, so they provide discounts when we sell Perfecto projects and licenses to our customers."
"Pricing-wise, it is fine. It is not as expensive as what we used to have in the past from HP, IBM, and others. It is decently priced."
"It's definitely on the higher end of prices for this type of service."
"Perfecto is about 30-40% cheaper than Device Anywhere. That was a big reason why we switched. Perfecto also solves some of the issues that we had with Device Anywhere. We have grown by 100% since we started to use Perfecto, and now we have devices roaming. When we look at the competition, we would still stick with Perfecto."
"Perfecto has definitely saved us on the costs and efforts of having to maintain our own virtual test environment. We lost about 20 devices in the past to maintenance and audit. That was a massive loss for us, as a company, because we were giving devices to someone, but don't know whether we would get it back or not. Having those virtual labs, we don't need to worry about these kinds of things. We are easily saving $5,000 to $10,000 a month on device costing."
"This is an expensive solution compared to others, by 30% to 40%."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise23
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise23
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Parasoft SOAtest?
I am not involved in the pricing aspect, setup cost, or licensing cost of Parasoft SOAtest. Our dedicated tools and support teams handle those aspects.
What needs improvement with Parasoft SOAtest?
One improvement would be to integrate it with modern technologies such as AI, so we can generate test cases by providing the details so that it can generate the structure, and later the person work...
What is your primary use case for Parasoft SOAtest?
We use Parasoft SOAtest for API testing and service virtualization with responder setup. Service virtualization is very helpful in our testing. When any downstream system is not available or we are...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

SOAtest
Perfecto Mobile, Perfecto Web
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife
Virgin Media, Paychex, Rabobank, R+V, Discover
Find out what your peers are saying about Parasoft SOAtest vs. Perfecto and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.