We performed a comparison between ReadyAPI Test 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."The out-of-the-box support for the database is a valuable feature."
"The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, it's easy to use and easy to teach to others."
"The tool’s scalability is very good."
"SoapUI Pro is a good tool when it comes to API design and orchestration. Additionally, it is beneficial for functional and for performance testing."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"It's a very simple solution to use."
"Using SoapUI's automation suites to run all our test cases saved us a lot of time. Running 300 test cases takes about three to four days. When you automate all that, it takes only two to three hours."
"Selenium integration."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is regression testing tools."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."
"The product has many features."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"ReadyAPI Test needs to improve its reporting. While reports provide essential information when issues arise, or tests fail, having more graphical representations directly within the reports would be beneficial. It needs to improve stability and scalability as well. The tool's support is slow, and takes months to reach a solution."
"SoapUI would benefit from some more customization abilities. It's a good interface, but it would be nice if they added the ability to build custom dashboards where the user can do their own bar graphs and pie charts."
"Could integrate the graphing module for load testing."
"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."
"There aren't any plugins for UI automation. You need to make a custom code and download a job to put into the libraries. If it were panelized, then it would be straightforward. It should be in a panel of the tools, so you can add those tools as your test step in your test cases."
"Grouping of the cases is not possible in SoapUI, to my knowledge. When working with critical cases or the, we were not able to group them properly. We can definitely create a suite and add them there, but within a whole suite, we have to identify them, which was not easy."
"SoapUI Pro is a little heavy due to the number of features. Previously it was not that heavy. Now the tool is too heavy, they should work on fixing this issue because until your system has lots of resources, you won't be able to use it seamlessly. The performance of the application itself could improve."
"We tried automation but it's not easy to integrate with the synching and some of the mission tools that we use for automated testing of APIs."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"At times, identifying or locating an element can be somewhat challenging. However, in a recent test update, they introduced Optical Character Recognition (OCR) capability. This introduction has reduced the challenges to some extent, as we can now utilize OCR if the normal method doesn't work. Nevertheless, there is still significant potential for improvement in TestComplete's ability to identify various object elements. I don't have any specific concerns to mention. I have observed significant improvements in TestComplete over the past few years, especially in its support for highly dynamic object elements used in products like Salesforce Dynamics 365. In earlier versions, there were numerous challenges, but the current version is far superior to its predecessors."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"I didn't use it very heavily. One issue that I found was that there wasn't a quick way or a button to move Visual Basic scripts to TestComplete. We have a lot of such scripts in our organization, and it would be very useful to have some option to easily move these scripts. It is currently possible to convert these scripts to TestComplete, but it is not easy. I have to write some code, but everything is not available immediately."
"To bring it up to a 10, I would be looking for the addition of some key functional API testing."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"Right now, when you buy the solution, you need to pay for one solution. You receive one set up and you install it and it's just in that one machine. It would be ideal if they could offer one subscription where you can connect to different machines with a group subscription."
ReadyAPI Test is ranked 15th in Functional Testing Tools with 31 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 72 reviews. ReadyAPI Test is rated 8.0, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ReadyAPI Test writes "You can achieve any complex task with this tool". 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 Test is most compared with Postman, Broadcom Service Virtualization, ReadyAPI, Tricentis Tosca and Apigee, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and froglogic Squish. See our ReadyAPI Test vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.
