Parasoft SOAtest Reviews

The primary use case for adopting Parasoft SOAtest is to test web services/middleware testing (SOAP/REST/MQ/SAP RFC/EDI/FTP). 

Inbuilt support:

• REST: WADL and JSON.
• SOAP: WSDL.
• SAP RFC
• Message queuing supported: JMS, MQ, and NET WCF.
• Protocols supported: TCP/IP, FTP, EDI, WSDL, WADL, WS-*, UDDI, RMI, EJB, webMethods, TIBCO, SMTP, and custom.
• Languages Supported: Java, JavaScript, Groovy, Jython
• Virtualization
• Third-party tool integration (plug and play)
• Stored procedure testing and DB validation
• UI recording through Selenium WebDriver.
• I've used this solution for more than 6.7 years.

Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization. 

The best feature to integrate with third party tools is the integrated plug and play without any rework, which makes it more valuable than any other tools. 

Parasoft SOAtest has more visibility in regards to testing support data and reporting mechanisms.

Through Parasoft 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.

Advantageous Points:

• Easy handling of RESTful APIs/SOAP calls.
• Getting the data on the API performance side, such as response time and segregation of failed API issues based on returning code captured by fault injections.
• Comparison of current responses with baseline response to figure out issues in case of failure with an exact location point.

• Diff control tool
• Reporting
• Different service types of support (SOAP, REST, SAP RFC, and UI recording)
• Third-party tool integration: GitHub and Jenkins.
• Plug and play
• Service virtualization
• Marketplace

Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements.                                     

No issues.

No issues.

I have had an awesome experience while working with the customer service/technical support teams. They have resolved issues within a day or two.

If issues are reported to the Parasoft Support Team, they will resolve them by taking it to t-con or v-con. Also, they are very supportive and well-versed with the proper information.

We have been using this solution for more than 6.7 years. 

I have used other solutions as well, but I did not get proper support during our testing due to the constraints for testing in particular areas.

It is simple to do the setup starting from installation until usage. It does not require any specific skill (i.e., it is the same as any other tool installation).

They were well-versed with the proper information. 

We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%.

It is a commercial tool. The license price is a little expensive, but it provides a better outcome in terms of the end-to-end automation process.

While evaluating tools for web service testing, I tried different solutions (freeware and highly-used), but they did not provide some mechanism/features that I could test my respective scenarios to FTP, EDI, MQ, and even SOAP calls. Because of this, I moved back to the existing solution.

I have been using this solution for more than six years. I have not found any issues while doing automation. 

Repeatable automated regression tests in a SOA architecture IT landscape, for several SOAP/REST webservices including Web Gui end-to-end testing, all scenario-based for 10+ applications. Also, scheduled for test runs at night, using Jenkins.

It provides us with fast(er) test results, more predictable results and automatic (regression) test runs outside the employee workstations. This tooling made us more agile and more ready for continuous integration. We use the night hours to run different regression tests over systems, for which we only need to check the results in the morning.

• Fast and easy automated tests for UI
• Interfaces (SOAP, REST)
• Additional database queries
• Easy validations on responses (soap, rest, json, sql, Gui)

Most valuable for us is the combination of all these items in one solution for us. Broad user story scenario's from A to Z, though a chain of systems, including test data prerequisites.
The next most valuable benefit over the past year is the possibility to use the tooling for continuous testing purposes, using the server-side run option 'as a web service' for (nightly) batch runs.

In general, its user-friendliness needs a little improvement since there are a few bugs that still remain. It needs to be (possibly) more lightweight and have more validation options. The bulk changes in the test cases are not always easy. But all in all, these are minor details compared to the benefits that we have.

Very seldom, there were some stability issues but they do appear only from time to time. Since the 9.10 release we haven't seen this any more. Stable!

We only encountered scalability issues with large test scenarios, combining interfaces with a lot of browser GUI tests. Work-around is cutting up the test cases into smaller scenarios.

The technical support is fairly okay. Technical tool-wise they help a lot if needed, but when it comes to complex test scenarios or weird issues, they do not always have a solution.

An exchange of examples is difficult, since we use tooling for internal applications. So, it is not accessible from the outside world, which makes combined debugging impossible.

Initially, we were using some lightweight open-source (free) tools, but none met with our requirements fully; so we switched solutions.

The setup was fairly easy. They provide good instructions. The workstation install is a piece of cake and some additional (simple) config is needed, for Git/SVN etc. The license server install can be tricky, but it turned out to be fairly easy compared to the earlier versions.

We did it our self, with a little help from the seller.

Use floating licenses, so it’s not attached to one workstation. Furthermore, the pricing is something for the staff to handle, not for us. ;)

We mainly looked into the SoapUI solution, along with some Selenium software and besides that, other stand-alone database tooling options. We also evaluated manual testing.

Start off simple. Build your test setup from there. Do think about setting up some specific test cases as building blocks (reference material) for other test scenarios to use, so that the maintenance in the future is more easily done.

Also be sure to read the Help function, might help you on your way when you're facing some difficulties.

Automated execution and chaining of test validators is the most valuable feature; it is easily extensible via the built-in custom scripting API.

It has allowed us to build a large library of repeatable automated tests that are able to be quickly executed on demand. This builds a solid foundation for future initiatives expanding into a more continuous integration and the agile methodology adoption.

Memory Management suffers when using solutions other than the data repository for managing the test cases.

The platform can become unstable as the memory usage increases. For example, we use Excel spreadsheets for managing test cases, so the size of these test cases must be tightly controlled.

Scaling tests beyond a certain point can trigger issues with Memory Management, but good design practices usually indicate a need to break up a test before it would reach that point.

Technical support from Parasoft has been excellent.

The setup was straightforward. It was very easy to set up a test scenario that consumed assets in our web service layer and to run validation against the results. The tool itself allows for some more complex chaining of components within a test scenario, so familiarizing yourself with the tool enough to get more creative in your test setups can be more complex.

If you plan on using a floating-license model, plan on a buffer of at least 10 user tokens between the maximum allocated by your license and the expected usage for the tool.

I looked at SoapUI NG Pro.

Keep your test scenarios small and focused rather than trying to cover an entire web service with one scenario.

The facilities for testing API’s (services, REST API’s, messaging clients, etc..). Especially the features for parametrizing requests and checking responses are very powerful. But the product really shines in end-to-end testing, not only because of all the built-in tools supporting this, but also because of the great extensibility of the tool.

If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest.

As an expert user, you can accomplish a lot with this tool.

Using this tool, we were able to set up a nightly, still growing, company-wide regression test -- dramatically decreasing time being spent on (manual) regression testing.

• Web-testing facilities. This was not very good when we were using version 9.2, so we built our own Selenium framework and integrated this with SOAtest (this being possible at all is a very positive point in my opinion ;-).
• The user-interface is not very lightweight or friendly, sometimes buggy and cumbersome. The product has a steep learning curve, but very well worth the effort.
• There is virtually no (online) user community, except for an outdated forum. When having issues you have to find everything out yourself (or call in help from Parasoft).
• Reporting facilities can be better.
• Last but not least: using the tool in current continuous integration/delivery practices is not very easy or straightforward.

Five years.

Yes, the product can be buggy or crash sometimes. But not to the extent that it hinders working with it.

We had some issues with stability and performance -- with a growing testbase and/or ‘big’ tests. But these also were minor issues.

8 out of 10.

Technical staff living nearby are always prepared to come by and help with issues. Communicating with developers abroad is also satisfactory.

Not really, QTP was used a little before but was not the right tool for our purposes.

It was complex, but that had more to do with our own complex infrastructure than with the product itself. But it took some time to get the setup of the product right.

It is an expensive product, so think carefully about whether it fits your purposes and is the right tool for you. Support pack is helpful. Due to high license costs, the tool is not easy to use by many people in your organization (like with open-source tools) and so to make test automation something for the whole team.

Yes, but before I was involved, so I don’t know more than that.

Take your time to get to know SOAtest very well, don’t get put off by the steep learning curve, it’s very well worth the effort.

Automatic testing is the most valuable feature.

Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved.

I have used SOAtest for one year.

We get a lot of time-outs and after we start the run again it goes well.

We have had scalability issues.

I rate technical support 8/10.

It was our customer’s choice to use SOAtest.

The tool is complex.

We followed our customer’s choice.

Think twice before you start with it.

The most valuable features are the Browser Playback tool for recording and playing web scenarios (Web UI testing), and the messaging client for sending SOAP calls and for validating responses.

The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest.

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. The bigger the .TST file, the more time it costs. Sometimes a few seconds! An option is to split up the file into separate files, but often that’s no realistic option because you want to keep the test suites together.

TST-file is the container file in which all testsuites and teststeps are stored. It often happens that you have to change a teststep and want that change to be saved. Saving your teststep in an almost empty container (with only one testsuite and a few teststeps) will go very fast (within 1 second). Saving your step in a container with multiple testsuites and teststeps takes a lot more time. In my case sometimes five seconds.

Sometimes SOAtest hangs, but that is very sporadic. It could be caused by the stability of the environment of the customer in general.

We haven’t had any scalability issues.

The technical support in the Netherlands is very good. Questions about the tool are almost answered within a day. When needed, a Parasoft consultant joins the project for one day or more.

We used SoapUI for testing web services. In our case, the advantage of using Parasoft SOAtest is the use of the datasheet; with one message, you can loop through your datasheet and check all your data.

The setup was done by another team of the company and was out of our scope.

The products of Parasoft have the name; they’re expensive. I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses. A possible consequence could be getting more users and more familiarity in the Netherlands and around the world.

I have experience with a lot of other products, but when I started with this job (Dutch Government) three years ago, the product, SOAtest, had already been bought by the company.

Invest a lot of research time into what your exact needs are. After that, select some test tools to compare all the options. In my opinion, Parasoft has so many possibilities that it must have a place on your shortlist!

SOAtest is, at its base, a collection of tools that can be combined to generate test scenarios.

Input data can be gathered from any possible source from web GUIs, databases, Excel, and files and is used in SOAP/REST tools and web browser tools. The output of those tests can be saved in files and databases.

Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used.

The following features are particularly valuable to us:

• Generating SOAP/REST requests
• Validating responses against WSDL
• Scripting parts of an XML request
• Accessing DBs with JDBC
• Jenkins Continuous Integration
• Regression test automation
• Modular scenario setup

Our tests are run nightly on every environment using Jenkins CI.

We moved from the Waterfall/V-model to Agile a couple of years back. With SOAtest, we are able to test features in every sprint, quickly and efficiently.

We use SOAtest to test the interfaces of maybe a dozen back-end services, simulating multiple, different points of sale. For example, a customer web shop, a sales agent application, sales machines, or mobile apps.

Service interfaces are continually integrated and updated within SOAtest. We test most front-end features first with manual tests, and then integrate them with validations into SOAtest scenarios.

Before using SOAtest, we had a huge delay in acceptance testing due to the amount of manual regression tests that we had to do.

Sadly, almost everything needs improving. Don’t get me wrong, the tool is very powerful and immensely useful for day-to-day usage. But certain things are missing or are set up in a way that makes it unnecessarily complicated. Here are some examples:

• Replacing part of an XML request by script requires a variable in the scenario folder. This variable needs to be prepared before the SOAP request tool with the partial XML to be replaced in the request. This variable can then be set to replace a subtree of the XML request. It would be easier if we could directly set a script in the SOAP request tool as a replacement.
• 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.
• True parallel testing is currently impossible.
• There is a separate product ‘Load Test’ that has parallelism built in. But this is only to multiply a scenario with all test cases by a number of users executing all test cases. In a future release, there should be the option of running all test cases of a single test run in parallel to speed up testing.
• To build a modular scenario, you can reference test suite files and execute the test tools contained therein. But every test contained in the referenced test suite file will be executed, as it is set up in the test flow logic of this scenario.
• Sadly, there is no way to setup single operations of a web service and then combine those operations into a scenario. This is how SoapUI does it.
• SOAtest is a plug-in for Eclipse. But actually, it comes bundled with its own Eclipse and several other Eclipse plug-ins like PyDev. Although this ensures compatibility of all contained tools, it also means that every part is a little out of date. For example, PyDev is available as v4.5.5, which means you get Python v2.5.2.
• You can manually upgrade to a newer version, but this means every installation using your scenarios, and especially scripts, must be updated as well.

• We have been using v9.10 for about six months.
• We have used SOAtest itself for around five years (since v9.3).

We had a stability issue, but Parasoft support was always very helpful in finding a solution or a workaround.

I would give the technical support a rating of 10/10, or even 20/10!

No matter the problem, from simple user errors to complicated Eclipse issues, the support team is always quick to respond and is very good at what they do.

If you actually encounter some issue in which the first or second level support really can’t fix in a couple of minutes, then the third level support will dig deep and come up with amazing ways to help you.

There is a user driven support forum where you can get help and examples from other users.

We did not use another solution previously. We do use SOAtest and SoapUI in parallel:

• SoapUI is used as freeware by developers for single/simple SOAP requests.
• SOAtest is used by the testing team to build extremely complex scenarios.

Installation is easy and straightforward, as is the initial scenario building. SOAtest gives you the ability to choose how complex you want to build your scenarios.

The simplest level of usage is a full graphical view of requests and responses, storing values in data bank tools for use in later SOAP/REST request and SQL tools.

The more intricate levels consist of scripting in several available languages and really revealing the beauty of SOAtest.

The documentation guides you through several examples and helps enormously with the initial steps of building your test scenarios.

We evaluated SmartBear SoapUI.

• Learn XML as well as XPath.
• Learn Jython, a variation of Python running in the JRE. It gives you the option to import Java classes into your scripts and use the latest Java improvements, but without the type safe limitations and language complexity of Java.
• Implement your scenarios from the beginning with continuous integration in mind. For relative paths everywhere, abstraction in SOAtest environments etc., use a version control system to save and version your scenarios and scripts.
• Take a short course (less than one day) from the Parasoft support team to familiarize your test team members with the product very quickly.

We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product.

It has also enabled easy automation and concentration.

Working with the Parasoft team was very easy for us. They helped us get some of the solution customized, in terms of the things we needed, such as LDAP coding. We needed a special coding for that and we worked along with Parasoft to get that done successfully.

The primary use for us is the Web Services layer.

It enabled an easy integration of our adjacent platform that was for full automation. We did reach over 97% automation with the use of this tool. It was extremely lightweight.

The only unfortunate part is that as the organization no longer exists. Now there are different groups managing the tool.

Parasoft is not becoming the tool of choice for the next generation of software that we're building.

The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective.

However, Parasoft seems to be working on a solution to make the tool slightly lighter. That is one of the things that could be improved.

Of course, it is a technical tool, so perhaps the interface could be better. We all have our struggles with any tools that we learn.

We implemented Parasoft over five years ago.

In the beginning of the implementation, we did have some concerns in regards to the stability. Primarily, the concerns were about the licensing. We were not concerned that the application itself would crash. We never really experienced that and that did not become a problem for us.

There were no issues with the scalability. It's a user-based licensed product. As long as you have enough licenses, you can just do whatever you need in order to scale it.

In the beginning, we worked very closely with their technical support. They had great tech support and they did road shows once a year for us.

They would definitely listen to the concerns that we had and provided relevant feedback. The tech support is not just great, it is absolutely awesome!

We were with HPE and they failed with their new product. It was not compatible with what we already had scripted.

The decision to switch was made in order to create more flexibility within the groups who were using the tools.

The product is great. Sometimes companies make decisions based on the profit and not based on efficiency. 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'll see what happens next.

We did look into a couple of open source tools. We also have an array of other suites that we could use. For example, we looked at the SoapUI NG Pro suite and a couple of other tools out there.

We felt that Parasoft would be a mutual gain with our team, and with our performance team, because they would use a lot of the performance-center items.

That was primarily why the company agreed on making a switch, so that it would benefit both areas in which we had concerns with the HPE products.

My advice to anyone implementing this solution:

• Work closely with the tech support so that you don't get stuck on the little things.
• Since Parasoft provides tremendous tech support, work closely with them in order to get the first implementation and proof of concept done.
• You can then export from there based on your needs.

• Has the ability to add regression controls and scripts in different languages for parts of the test script.

• Regression controls help to create a baseline response and ignore the dynamic values, so we can compare against any future builds. We can tell the impact of any change right away. We can tell which APIs we need to focus on for the API backward compatibility. This feature was not found in any other product that I have used.
• The scripting support provided for Java scripts and languages that rely on Java is very helpful. This skill is easy to find in the industry.

It used to take a couple of days to run several scenarios of the billing project at AOL. I was able to automate a collection of 72 APIs and the back-end batch jobs, so as to run the whole thing in under 30 minutes.

I was having trouble with the browser automation on my Mac laptop. They need to make it easier, so as to configure and run this tool on Mac.

I have tried to automate purchasing QuickBooks from our corporate intranet. I could not signup for the Free Trial from the below URL, due to security certificate issues:

https://quickbooks.intuit.com/...

I got busy on other projects and did not revisit this. Apparently, I did not have similar kind of issues while using the Windows OS laptop, in the past.

There were no stability issues.

There were no scalability issues.

A few years ago, I would have given technical support a rating of 10/10. However, I would now give them a rating of 7/10.

Its ease of use and the variety of protocols that it supports are the main reasons why we switched solutions.

The setup was straightforward.

We evaluated several home-grown and open-source tools such as JMeter, Postman, and SoapUI.

This is the best tool for API and back-end automation.

• Being able to load existing .EDN and .XML messages and translate them into segments. I can use them to automate the generation of new messages.
• Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in.

We don’t have to manually create .EDN and .XML messages. We can do this with just one click now. This drastically decreases the time that is required to create these messages.

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. I have to restart the software for it to see the changes I’ve made. I have been in contact with the Parasoft Support Division and they told me that it was a known issue and that it has something to do with Java.

I’ve been using SOAtest for about four months now.

I haven’t experienced any stability issues.

I haven’t experienced any scalability issues.

I would give technical support a rating of 9/10. When I encountered an issue, I could always ask for support from Parasoft and they replied with answers very quickly.

The project hasn’t used any other solution before this one.

The setup was very easy. Just a plain installation on Windows and the activation of the license key are required.

From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn’t the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer. We are only using it for generating test messages, but there is so much more that you can do with it. I suggest getting full support from Parasoft.

I joined my current project at a later stage, but I’m sure that other options were evaluated before choosing Parasoft SOAtest for this project. Unfortunately, I don’t know which other options were evaluated.

You need to check all the features that Parasoft SOAtest offers. If you just need a specific feature from the program, then there could be a cheaper alternative option that works just as well. (This is an assumption.) If you’re looking for a complete testing software/suite, Parasoft SOAtest is a serious option.

For integration tests, it’s hard to set up component tests due to dependencies. This means you cannot test without using the other components in the loop. The combination of SOATest + Virtualize gives us the opportunity to do this much easier and also to test very early in the development cycle (#Fail Fast, #Fail Early).

We can now test as early as possible, so we are achieving better control over our components.

I would like to see more concrete examples, easy to download studies of very simple Java projects, or TIBCO stuff. Now, I’m sometimes stuck and only finding whitepapers or other reading material, without having concrete examples.

Sometimes I’m stuck, and in that case, it’s useful to have simple examples. I see some shipped examples that are good, but I focus more on the Test automation as part of Continuous Delivery.

For example, yes, there is maven integration and the plugins are explained on a high abstract level. I would to like see simple examples just to showcase and give people a jump start. I found it out by experimenting, I will make this public on my blog in a couple of weeks, just to help the community.

Normally, I’m looking first for some git-repo’s supported with wiki’s, this is what I sometimes miss with Parasoft.

Another topic: SOATest is an integration testing tools, so I was expecting more examples around Tibco BW. Since it commonly just in combination.

Bottom line, modernize the way of documentation.

We are using the solution for four months already. We are using Parasoft SOATest 9.9 and Virtualize 9.9.

Till now, it seems to be stable with no issues.

We didn't encounter any issues with scalability.

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.

I used to use more open-source tooling. SOATest speeds up our test implementation in the integration context.

With open source, you have to build a lot of plumbing code to get it to work. With SOATest, you can directly focus on the test effort.

BUT, within these open-source frameworks, I did more BDD-oriented testing than seems to be possible with SOATest. So I need to spend more time to find the correct direction within the combined SOATest/Virtualize. Compare this with frameworks like Cucumber or FitNesse and there seems to be more control in organizing the test code.

I think it’s worth the price as long you can set up the test implementation & maintenance.

We evaluated IBM RTW. I think it has a little bit more control, but it’s more expensive.

My advice to others would depend on where they come from and what they want.

I have used SOATest 9.6 and 9.8 version in my project for automating the webmethods. It 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.

It provides easy handling of RESTful API's and figuring out exact API scalability, responses, and failed API's, returning code captured by the fault injections. We also used other utilities provided by Parasoft like, Datasource, Extension tools and DB tools which reduces most of our manual effort and increased the requirement coverage in automation.

The beauty of Parasoft SOA test tool is that it will support more scripting languages based on QA engineer comfort.

1. More descriptive reports are needed. Very high level reporting is not available.

2. Also the price is a little expensive in terms of users when compared to other similar tools available in the market.

3. WorkSpace is getting corrupted very often.

4. Integrating with other test management tools is really difficult.

1. Parasoft SOA test tool is very good for webservices automation.

2. It provides support for a variety of protocols including JSON.

3. It also provides multiple language support, such as Jython, Phython, Java, Ruby, and Javascript, whichever the tester is comfortable to plug and play with.

4. It is more user friendly when compared to other webservice automation tools.

5. This tool provides a variety of data sources including bean wizard and writable data source.

1. In our project we have to work with multiple tools like FTP, Database, Web services and Java. Parasoft is a bundle of these tools. With just one click I can access any utilities mentioned above. Currently it's saving lots of my time.

2. Parallel run is one of the significant features of Parasoft which saves more effort in my current project by executing the same regression package in different environments in parallel. 

3. Parasoft Console logs are very detail and precise. It helps us to to understand the issue quickly and easily. A normal QA person can understand the logs. 

1. We face issues when working with datasource. In my project we used a CSV file as an input test data files. However when the test data file (CSV) is empty then Parasoft stops abruptly. A workaround we found is to fill some dummy data into the datasource (CSV). We filed a case with Parasoft support about this issue. 

2. Parasoft has lots of limitation when integrating with ALM. We tried with a VAPI script, however it did not work as we expected. I personally feel this is the area to improve in order to compete with the other tools on the market. 

3. We noticed that our project workspace is sometimes corrupted without any reason. Without backups it creates lots of issues. It needs more focus in this area by giving the valid reason for the corruption.

It improved my project ROI in various portions of the testing life cycle.

1. The Parasoft reporting feature needs to be more effective in terms of status graphical representation. Parasoft report doesn’t provide graphical representation, meaning summary of report which indicate - how many test scenarios passed or failed, basically the management is expecting this kind overall summary report. So far, the Parasoft report will be prepared manually and sharing with other stakeholders. 

2. I personally feel that 50% of Parasoft features are provided by SoapUI free of cost. However, not all the webservices protocols.SoapUI is an open source tool that supports most protocols such as SOAP, REST, HTTP, JMS, AMF, and JDBC. From a business perspective, why should a company invest money on Parasoft licensing which has a high cost

3. We cannot use the WebUI testing in full mode and we need more focused improvements in that area. I tried to use Parasoft for functional testing (web testing), such as clicking a button and selecting a value from a dropbox, but I figured out that the tool is mostly built for web service automation and User Interface automation. For instance, HPE UFT is a tool with a bundle of features(web service automation and functional automation). I know Parasoft supports basic WebUI automation but with limitations.

1. Event Monitoring is a valuable feature in SOATest that helped us in validating the back-end requests for mappings and transformations.

2. Variety of tools like diff tool, date math tool, xml assertor, xml transformer, custom extensions, etc. make our life easy.

3. Structural and functional reports, that helps easy reporting and recording of results.

SOATest provided a platform for automated testing and creating an enriched automated regression suite.

The need to refresh 'Test Case Explorer' when adding a data source or environment file, can be improved.

We've used it for 1.5 years and going

The deployment was quite easy and straightforward.

We didn't encounter any issues with stability.

We didn't encounter any issues with scalability.

8/10

8/10

The initial solution available at the clients location was WCFStorm that was completely manual and not very easy to use. When we got a chance to implement the Parasoft toolset, it was pretty obvious that this would make our lives easy.

One key feature of using SOAtest tool is that it provided us early entry in testing cycle without any services. SOAtest provided a solution of testing codes and integrated services before any solid application is developed.

Work file [tst] gradually increases in size due to saving or updates of workspace.  I can see a major improvement in that.

7+

No deployment issues.

No issues.

No issues.

Previously used SoapUI.

• API support for JSON and REST payload
• Virtualization
• Complete visibility of all the conditions, circumstances, and influences surrounding and affecting the testing of software servers and environment

It provides easy handling of RESTful API's and figuring out exact API scalabilty, responses, and failed API's, returning code captured by the fault injections.

More descriptive reports are needed.

I've used it for six months.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered, however, more scalability is needed, especially when testing in elastics/cloud platforms.

8/10.

9/10.

We previously used JMeter and were offered better support from Parasoft. As well as this, the reports and user friendliness of SOAtest helped us make the decision to switch.

It's very easy to set up and doesn't take much time. You don't need installation expertise to set it up.

We used a vendor team from Parasoft themselves who were very good.

It's 100%.

The price is a little expensive in terms of users.

We evaluated JMeter as well, which was our existing product.

Even validate SOASTA tool too.

XML assertions, XML data bank, various tools available internallly

Achieved testing middleware services and automating them with the features in SOATest. API testing is made easy. Automation and regression test suite was achieved without the need to write much code.

Performance of the tool

5 years

No

Performance issues if there are too many sessions open on your system.

Good

Good

No

Easy

Knowledgeable

Web services and API test automation was made simple without writing much code.

• Tool offers easy ability to rapidly set up functional test scenarios
• The tool interface is very user friendly and the user guide is a great help
• Tool allows custom scripting and integrates well with most frequently used Source Control tools
• Utilizing features that support Data Driven testing and E2E has increased efficiencies drastically

5 Years. I have used the tool mostly for Web Service Testing.

ParaSoft offers a great customer service, its a great combination along with a good product.

Excellent and very approachable!

• The ability to rapidly set up functional test scenarios using WSDL web service descriptions or XSD message specifications
• The ability to quickly make these test scenarios data driven using one of a variety of Data Sources
• The ability to quickly add validation and verification points in these test scenarios
• The ability to add custom validations and actions to these test scenarios using the integrated scripting environment

• The features of SOAtest used for testing (web) applications on user interface level suffice for very basic web applications, but there are better tools on the market.
• The report output could use some work. It contains a lot of technical details which are quite clear to the person or team that implemented the automated tests, but they are not really suited for distribution to, for example, a management team.

• There's a myriad of tools available within SOAtest. Learn to know them and how to use them.
• The possibility for additional scripting is very powerful, but only use it when necessary to avoid overly complex test suites.

Disclosure: The company I work for is a Parasoft partner