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

OpenText Silk Test vs Parasoft SOAtest 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

OpenText Silk Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
20th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
20th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (8th)
Parasoft SOAtest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
19th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
18th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (25th), API Testing Tools (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Silk Test is 1.0%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.8%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

SrinivasPakala - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Milind Parab - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable solution that can be used for automotive compliance and generates good reports
Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings. Going through that is a challenge. It only happens in the initial stage when we are setting up the tool, but it can be improved. Parasoft SOAtest could add code coverage, which will help us do the coverage in a single tool.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"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."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"We can automate our scenarios in a data driven format, which shows there is no rework on scripts. We only need to update the test data and run for a number of scenarios."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"The solution is scalable."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
 

Cons

"The pricing could be improved."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."
"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."
"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."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"Enabling/disabling an optional element of an XML request is only possible if a data source (e.g., Excel sheet) is connected to the test. Otherwise, the option is not available at all in the drop-down menu."
"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

"We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."
"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."
"It is an expensive product, so think carefully about whether it fits your purposes and is the right tool for you."
"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."
"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%."
"The price is around $5,000 USD."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Retailer
5%
Financial Services Firm
24%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
5%
 

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.
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.
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

Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
SOAtest
 

Overview

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Silk Test vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.