We performed a comparison between ReadyAPI and Selenium HQ 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."When you are working in sprints, you need to have continuous feedback. ReadyAPI definitely helps in automating very fast and rapidly. We have less coding, and we can more easily define our assertions. We don't use it for full-blown performance testing, but normally if you are doing your functional testing, it gives you the request and response time. Anybody who is doing functional testing can see what the request and response times are and raise a flag based upon their business affiliates, that is, whether it is meeting their affiliates. You can identify this during functional testing."
"ReadyAPI's best features are user-friendliness, smooth integration with Postman, the speed of creating test cases, and integration with customer data."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the ready-to-use assertions and filters which can perform the validation. If we want to filter out any value, the filters are available. Apart from that database integration, if you want to go ahead and perform validation in the database layer it is possible with the ready-to-use feature available. The execution and reporting are rich features."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."
"It's easy to learn how to use it."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the scripting tools and the connectivity to external data sources, such as Excel and PDF files. There are plenty of useful features that are useful, such as automating flexibility and usability. Overall, the solution is easy to use."
"I haven't seen any other tool that offers both types of tests. This is very helpful for us, and it's one of the main reasons why we chose this service."
"It can create stress tests very fast, and some features help you do it fast."
"I like its simplicity."
"It's easy for new people to get trained on this solution. If we are hiring new people, the resource pool in the market in test automation is largely around Selenium."
"The testing solution produces the best web applications."
"The plugins, the components, and the method of the library with Selenium is very user defined."
"Data parametrization and parallelization are the most important features in any automation tool."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is it provides support for third-party tools, such as screenshots, and automates Windows-based applications."
"The ability to present your tests on a wiki page and hooking them up to the scripts/fixtures."
"ReadyAPI can improve because it is limited to only SOAP and REST services. They should update the solution to include more protocols so that other people are not limited to SOAP and REST services. Other than would be able to utilize it."
"To generate a test suite in API, I had to create a separate one each time because otherwise it was just override the test. Each API had to be added separately. I thought I could just have one and then create different methods, but I had to add each API separately to create the test for that. That is an area that could be improved."
"The UI should be flexible. Currently, the UI isn't."
"It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today. Other solutions have an in-built mechanism where I can directly and easily connect. An API is more around a user submitting a request on the frontend. It then hits the backend, puts the data, and responds back. If I am hitting MongoDB or NoSQL databases, I do not have ready-made inbuilt solutions in ReadyAPI that can easily help me in automating it faster. In our organization, we deal with NoSQL databases, and therefore, we need Groovy. We just cannot have a connector from ReadyAPI to do that. I have to write Groovy scripts. If you have themes that are predominantly using MongoDB, it leads to more maintenance and support activity because we are introducing more code into our commission. In terms of additional features, it can have cloud support. This is one of the things where we are getting into cloud support. We'll see how it works, but it is one of the doubts that we still have."
"Performance and memory management both need to be improved because other solutions use less memory for the same amount of data."
"The Property Transfer capability could be more user friendly because it is a bit difficult to understand."
"It is challenging doing upgrades and patches because sometimes the environmental variables or suits in the projects get erased."
"Sometimes, if I changed something in ReadyAPI, it would not quickly pick up the change. It used to give me the same error repeatedly, and when I closed the application completely and restarted it, it would pick up that change."
"Shadow DOM could be improved and the handling of single page applications. Right now, it's a bit complicated and there are a lot of additional scripts required if you want to handle a single page application in a neat way."
"Whenever an object is changed or something is changed in the UI, then we have to refactor the code."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
"The solution's UI path needs to be modernized."
"For email-based applications, we can't automate as we would like to, making it necessary to bring in a third-party product to do so."
"The solution is open-source, so everyone relies on the community to assist with troubleshooting and information sharing. If there's a complex issue no one has faced, it may take a while to solve the problem."
"To simplify the development process, everyone needs to do a Selenium Framework to acquire the web application functions and features from Selenium methods."
"If they can integrate more recording features, like UFT, it would be helpful for automation, but it's not necessary. They can also add a few more reporting features for advanced reporting."
ReadyAPI is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. ReadyAPI is rated 7.8, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of ReadyAPI writes "Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, ReadyAPI Test and OpenText LoadRunner Professional, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test. See our ReadyAPI vs. Selenium HQ report.
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.