Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

Parasoft SOAtest vs Silk Test comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Parasoft Logo
4,163 views|2,704 comparisons
Micro Focus Logo
3,731 views|2,447 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Parasoft SOAtest and Silk Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Parasoft SOAtest vs. Silk Test report (Updated: September 2022).
633,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."

More Parasoft SOAtest Pros →

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

More Silk Test Pros →

Cons
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."

More Parasoft SOAtest Cons →

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

More Silk Test Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
  • "We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."
  • More Silk Test Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    633,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally.
    Top Answer:From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly. Some aspects were difficult and therefore less useful for us, perhaps we lack the coding knowledge on that.
    Top Answer:We are a large company based in India. The primary use case of this solution is for our REST architecture. Parasoft uses different languages like JSON, XML and SORBS. It's like an API testing tool and… more »
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer:We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee.
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Ranking
    24th
    Views
    4,163
    Comparisons
    2,704
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    458
    Rating
    7.0
    19th
    Views
    3,731
    Comparisons
    2,447
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    752
    Rating
    7.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    SOAtest
    Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
    Learn More
    Overview
    Parasoft SOAtest is widely recognized as the leading enterprise-grade solution for API testing and API integrity. Thoroughly test composite applications with robust support for REST and web services, plus an industry-leading 120+ protocols/message types.
    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.
    Offer
    Learn more about Parasoft SOAtest
    Learn more about Silk Test
    Sample Customers
    Lufthansa, Siemens, DirecTV, NZ Bank
    Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm46%
    Government15%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Energy/Utilities Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Computer Software Company18%
    Comms Service Provider11%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company22%
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Comms Service Provider10%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise68%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise74%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise60%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise72%
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    September 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Micro Focus, SeleniumHQ and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: September 2022.
    633,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 24th in Functional Testing Tools with 1 review while Silk Test is ranked 19th in Functional Testing Tools with 2 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 7.0, while Silk Test is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Good API testing and RIT feature; clarity could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Silk Test writes "A stable solution with good scripting feature, but needs better scalability and a bigger pool of third-party contractors". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, ReadyAPI Test, Coverity and Tricentis Tosca, whereas Silk Test is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, Selenium HQ, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter and Tricentis Tosca.

    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.