Coverity vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

Black Duck and Parasoft are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Black Duck is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while Parasoft is ranked #27 with an average rating of 8.5. Black Duck holds a 7.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to Parasoft’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Black Duck users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of Parasoft users who would recommend it.

Coverity

Read 42 Coverity reviews

11,994 Views
8,326 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Parasoft SOAtest

Read 31 Parasoft SOAtest reviews

902 Views
551 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

Coverity

Parasoft SOAtest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Parasoft SOAtest and Coverity are leading tools in software testing and code analysis. Coverity holds an upper hand due to its superior feature set despite higher costs.

Features: Parasoft SOAtest provides strong automated testing, integration support, and flexibility in handling web services. Coverity offers robust static analysis, vulnerability detection, and quality assurance for complex codebases.

Room for Improvement: Parasoft SOAtest needs better documentation, improved integration options, and a more intuitive user interface. Coverity faces challenges with high complexity, a need for streamlined workflows, and demands for enhanced user guidance.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Parasoft SOAtest is noted for its straightforward deployment process. Coverity is recognized for responsive customer support. Deployment favors Parasoft SOAtest, while support leans towards Coverity.

Pricing and ROI: Parasoft SOAtest has a competitive pricing strategy and offers swift ROI. Coverity, though more expensive, promises substantial long-term ROI attributable to its advanced features.

To learn more, read our detailed Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 851,604 peers since 2012

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

Coverity

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

4th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Parasoft SOAtest

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

27th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (19th), API Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (19th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 7.5%, up from 6.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Md. Shahriar Hussain

Information Security Analyst at Banglalink

Offers impressive reporting features with user-friendliness and high scalability

The solution can be easily setup but requires heavy integration due to the multiple types of port and programming languages involved. Comparing the resource requirements of the solution I would say it can be installed effortlessly. I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. A professional needs some pre-acquired knowledge to manage Coverity's deployment process, but the local solution partners provide support well enough for trouble-free deployment. The overall deployment process of Coverity took around two and a half hours in our organization. The deployment duration depends upon the operating system and resources including high-end RAM and CPU processors.

Read full review

Ajit Kumar Rout

Sr Quality Assurance Engineer at Wabtec Industrial

Good API testing and RIT feature; clarity could be improved

In general, this is a hassle free, user friendly tool and it doesn't require much knowledge if you're using the manual testing. Automated testing is also good but requires some knowledge in that field. It has some great features. It's a good tool compared to some of the other paid tools; input and output can be stored before extension and there is also a verification assessment that can be implemented by using some different methodologies inside the tool. If the licensing cost is suitable then I recommend this solution. If you have automation people with in-depth knowledge in coding that will be helpful. I rate this solution a seven out of 10.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Considering the analysis part and the benchmarking process involving the product that my company carried out, the solution is good for finding bugs and violations"

"It's very stable."

"Coverity gives advisory and deviation features, which are some of the parts I liked."

"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."

"The most valuable feature of Coverity is its software security feature called the Checker. If you share some vulnerability or weakness then the software can find any potential security bug or defect. The code integration tool enables some secure coding standards and implements some Checkers for Live Duo. So we can enable secure coding and Azure in this tool. So in our software, we can make sure our software combines some industry supervised data."

"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."

"This solution is easy to use."

"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."

More Coverity pros

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

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

"One of the most valuable features I found in Parasoft SOAtest is its ability to extend the product."

"The solution is scalable."

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

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

"Technical support is helpful."

"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."

More Parasoft SOAtest pros

Cons

"We're currently facing a primary challenge with automation using Coverity. Each developer has a license and can perform manual checks, and we also have a nightly build that analyzes the entire software. The main issue is that the tool can't look behind submodules in our code base, so it doesn't see changes stored there."

"Coverity is far from perfection, and I'm not 100 percent sure it's helping me find what I need to find in my role. We need exactly what we are looking for, i.e. security errors and vulnerabilities. It doesn't seem to be reporting while we are changing our code."

"The quality of the code needs improvement."

"The setup takes very long."

"It would be great if we could customize the rules to focus on critical issues."

"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."

"We actually specified several checkers, but we found some checkers had a higher false positive rate. I think this is a problem. Because we have to waste some time is really the issue because the issue is not an issue. I mean, the tool pauses or an issue, but the same issue is the filter now.Some check checkers cannot find some issues, but sometimes they find issues that are not relevant, right, that are not really issues. Some customisation mechanism can be added in the next release so that we can define our Checker. The Modelling feature provided by Coverity helps in finding more information for potential issues but it is not mature enough, it should be mature. The fast testing feature for security testing campaign can be added as well. So if you correctly integrate it with the training team, maybe you can help us to find more potential issues."

"Coverity could improve the ease of use. Sometimes things become difficult and you need to follow the guides from the website but the guides could be better."

More Coverity cons

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

"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."

"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."

"Reporting facilities can be better."

"The summary reports could be improved."

"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."

"The performance could be a bit better."

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

More Parasoft SOAtest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."

"The tool was fairly priced."

"Offers varying prices for different companies"

"Coverity is very expensive."

"The solution's pricing is comparable to other products."

"The solution is affordable."

"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."

"I would rate Coverity's pricing as a nine out of ten. It's already very expensive, and it's a problem for us to get more licenses due to the price. The pricing model has some good aspects - for example, a personal license gives access to all languages without code limitations, which is better than some competitors. However, it's still a lot of money for us to spend."

More Coverity pricing and cost advice

"I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses."

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

"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."

"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."

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

"The price is around $5,000 USD."

"They do have a confusing licensing structure."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

33%

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Computer Software Company

11%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?

We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...

See all answers

What do you like most about Coverity?

The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?

I do not know about the pricing.

See all answers

What do you like most about Parasoft SOAtest?

Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity

Compared 49% of the time

Klocwork vs Coverity

Compared 7% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Veracode vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

GitLab vs Coverity

Compared 1% of the time

More Coverity Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 23% of the time

Postman vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 21% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 9% of the time

ReadyAPI vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 8% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 8% of the time

More Parasoft SOAtest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Coverity

May 2025

Download Coverity product report

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft SOAtest

May 2025

Download Parasoft SOAtest product report

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis

SOAtest

Overview

Coverity gives you the speed, ease of use, accuracy, industry standards compliance, and scalability that you need to develop high-quality, secure applications. Coverity identifies critical software quality defects and security vulnerabilities in code as it’s written, early in the development process, when it’s least costly and easiest to fix. With the Code Sight integrated development environment (IDE) plugin, developers get accurate analysis in seconds in their IDE as they code. Precise actionable remediation advice and context-specific eLearning help your developers understand how to fix their prioritized issues quickly, without having to become security experts.

Coverity seamlessly integrates automated security testing into your CI/CD pipelines and supports your existing development tools and workflows. Choose where and how to do your development: on-premises or in the cloud with the Polaris Software Integrity Platform (SaaS), a highly scalable, cloud-based application security platform. Coverity supports more than 20 languages and 200 frameworks and templates.

Black Duck

Parasoft SOAtest delivers fully integrated API and web service testing capabilities that automate end-to-end functional API testing. Streamline automated testing with advanced codeless test creation for applications with multiple interfaces (REST & SOAP APIs, microservices, databases, and more).

SOAtest reduces the risk of security breaches and performance outages by transforming functional testing artifacts into security and load equivalents. Such reuse, along with continuous monitoring of APIs for change, allows faster and more efficient testing.

Parasoft

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space

Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife

Buyer's Guide

Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest

April 2025

Free Report: Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest

Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Coverity vs. Parasoft SOAtest report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.