We performed a comparison between Parasoft SOAtest and UiPath Test Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"Technical support is helpful."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"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."
"The solution is scalable."
"The document understanding is good."
"Our team used to require five to six days to complete the entire release or execution cycle. Now, we're able to complete it within just one or one and a half days."
"UiPath's tools are generally designed for business users, so they can be as simple or as complex as needed."
"Test Suite has multiple tools that are fully integrated. It has everything you need to record your test cases, generate your documentation, and integrate synthetic data with your Orchestrator. I like the integrated aspect of it. The biggest advantage of UiPath is that it not only tests but also integrates with all the other services to offer a complete package."
"The detailed logging is invaluable."
"Being able to use regular expressions, activities, and attributes is valuable."
"The console, in a single pane, allows us to understand where we are in the testing environment."
"UiPath's most valuable features are reusability and low-code aspects. It works across both desktop and web applications."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"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."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"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."
"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."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"The test manager component could be improved."
"At FORWARD VI, we see new automations being built around AI and the ability to have developers understand how they can drive some of those AI capabilities with Studio. We are starting to see that. They should also drive that with UiPath Test Suite so that we can not only build that development side faster; we can also develop the tests that go along with it, hopefully automatically."
"With Selenium, there is a plugin called Healenium, which helps automatically detect changed properties of objects. With one click, it automatically updates the object repository with the changed properties. I would like UiPath to add that capability."
"UiPath needs to improve its Test Manager feature. Defect management and reporting also need improvement."
"UiPath could further enhance its functionality by simplifying the test case creation process within Test Suite."
"We have output arguments in the workflow. We can check results only by using those arguments. It would be better to have some more options, such as screen variables. For example, in a workflow, if we want to check if an activity is present inside, we should be able to get the output to UiPath Test Suite through the activity itself. That would be great for testing."
"Orchestrator is not easy to use or understand."
"The reporting could be improved. Often, we need to email a report to higher management, we can directly get the report from there. Also, the error reporting could be better."
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 21st in Test Automation Tools with 30 reviews while UiPath Test Suite is ranked 6th in Test Automation Tools with 17 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2, while UiPath Test Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UiPath Test Suite writes "Can be used by non-developers, and saves us time, but the manual testing needs improvement". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Klocwork, whereas UiPath Test Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, SmartBear TestComplete, Katalon Studio and froglogic Squish. See our Parasoft SOAtest vs. UiPath Test Suite report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.
