We performed a comparison between ReadyAPI and ReadyAPI Test 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."It's easy to learn how to use it."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the drag-and-drop options and the integration with versioning tool solutions, such as Git."
"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."
"It's easy to implement."
"The most valuable feature has been the assertion as a test step as this has allowed us to increase the scope of testing and validation."
"The initial setup of ReadyAPI is straightforward."
"One of the features of ReadyAPI that's worth mentioning is that it allows you to parameterize. I'm working with more than two hundred resources, so I don't have to go and make a small change at each point every time. I have the option to just parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere. Another valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it provides a customized environment. In my company, you work in different environments, such as QA, UAT, and LT, so the URLs for every environment are different. In ReadyAPI, you can customize your environment, set it up, then start working on it. Another feature worth mentioning that's offered in ReadyAPI is automating your test value as the tool allows Groovy scripting. In your test case, you can use a Groovy script that says that in a particular test case, you have ten resources, but you just want to exhibit five and that you don't want to exhibit the remaining five. You can write a small Groovy script that lets you execute just five resources out of the ten resources. I also like that ReadyAPI allows you to read the data from CFC and Excel. It also allows you to create or customize your data, but that only works at a certain point because every application has its specific data. ReadyAPI cannot generate every data, but when I'm posting and I want to generate a random name, such as a first name, I can do it in ReadyAPI. The tool also has many different features which I find valuable, including Git integration."
"The performance testing capabilities are very good."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"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."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, it's easy to use and easy to teach to others."
"We used to write our own solutions, from small scripts to task web services, so this saves us thousands of hours."
"It's a very simple solution to use."
"The solution has some good scanning features."
"The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"The solution offers excellent integration capabilities."
"ReadyAPI could improve by adding a conversion tool from one file type to another. Import support for multiple file types would be beneficial."
"ReadyAPI could improve by having dynamic validation information."
"The solution is made up of multiple tools, and the one additional feature we'd like to have is load testing."
"The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved."
"Performance and memory management both need to be improved because other solutions use less memory for the same amount of data."
"If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful."
"ReadyAPI's customer support isn't that great, particularly their response time."
"Version control does not work well."
"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."
"Could integrate the graphing module for load testing."
"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."
"I find that I'm fighting with the opportunities to order requests."
"Stability has been an issue for us. It needs to be looked at and made a bit better."
"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."
"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."
"If the load and bare minimum could be defined, I would give this solution a higher rating."
ReadyAPI is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while ReadyAPI Test is ranked 15th in Functional Testing Tools with 31 reviews. ReadyAPI is rated 7.8, while ReadyAPI Test 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 ReadyAPI Test writes "You can achieve any complex task with this tool". ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, SmartBear TestComplete and Parasoft SOAtest, whereas ReadyAPI Test is most compared with Postman, Broadcom Service Virtualization, Tricentis Tosca and Apigee. See our ReadyAPI vs. ReadyAPI Test 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.
