We performed a comparison between Parasoft SOAtest and Zeenyx AscentialTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."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."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"The solution is scalable."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"It’s been really easy to automate the same application TestComplete struggled with. I have been able to automate two of our key applications in just a few months. I haven’t even taken their training."
"If you use the PowerBuilder application, do choose AscentialTest without thinking twice."
"The most valuable feature of AscentialTest for us is that it fully supports PowerBuilder."
"AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"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."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"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."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"I would like to see an improvement in the User Interface."
"Classes are not as object-oriented as I would like, but I am a programmer and not QA so I expect a lot."
"The only thing I can't wait for is for Zeenyx to add automating Mobile apps."
"Streamlining the retrieval of results from individual test set runs would be beneficial."
Earn 20 points
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 24th in Functional Testing Tools with 30 reviews while Zeenyx AscentialTest is ranked 19th in Functional Testing Tools with 13 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2, while Zeenyx AscentialTest is rated 9.4. 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 Zeenyx AscentialTest writes "Robust automation with reusable steps and seamless integration". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Klocwork, whereas Zeenyx AscentialTest is most compared with Tricentis Tosca and SmartBear TestComplete.
See our list of best Functional Testing 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.
