We performed a comparison between ReadyAPI and SmartBear TestComplete 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 we are doing API testing we have found it to be very efficient to receive results. Additionally, you are able to do tests directly from the API."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is being able to run each version for test suites."
"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."
"It's easy to automate for more data-driven testing."
"The interface is ok and they have the ability to re-load tests so that you can reuse them."
"It has the ability to combine it with different CI/CD tools."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them. The are other features that SmartBear TestComplete has but the competition widely has them as well."
"Recording and playback of tests were easier with SmartBear TestComplete...It is a scalable solution."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"I would like to see a better dashboard for monitoring in the next release of this solution."
"The reporting in ReadyAPI could be better. It can become sloppy, sometimes it works and other times it does not."
"The Property Transfer capability could be more user friendly because it is a bit difficult to understand."
"ReadyAPI could improve by having dynamic validation information."
"The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved."
"The content on ReadyAPI in SmartBear Academy is outdated."
"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."
"It is challenging doing upgrades and patches because sometimes the environmental variables or suits in the projects get erased."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"Headless testing would be a big improvement."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"In SmartBear TestComplete the integration with Jenkins could be easier. Additionally, some of the controls could have better customization options. For example, if a grid is used and it contains multiple controls within it, it can be a checkbox, radio button, or any kind of control, the way the Object Spy is operating currently there is a lot of room for improvement."
"It is very hard to read the test log generated by TestComplete Executor if the log file is very big. TestComplete Executor is a small tool for just running the TestComplete test framework (not for developing)."
"If that engine could better identify more XPaths automatically and make the process more flexible, that would be better."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
ReadyAPI is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 71 reviews. ReadyAPI is rated 7.8, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. 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 SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, ReadyAPI Test and Parasoft SOAtest, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and Telerik Test Studio. See our ReadyAPI vs. SmartBear TestComplete 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.