We performed a comparison between Broadcom Service Virtualization and ReadyAPI Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, OpenText, SmartBear and others in Service Virtualization."Unit testing or early life testing did not have to be stopped or delayed because those services were not available."
"The ability to create virtual services and deploy them as Docker containers, and include them in our Jenkins build pipelines, is a valuable feature."
"The ability to do parallel development and testing reduces our costs for duplicating environments, improving the productivity of our developers, and bringing products faster to market."
"You can create virtual services from a live recording or convert raw traffic into request/response pairs."
"The most valuable feature is that it supports so many protocols. We, being a large bank, have almost all the protocols, and it supports all of them, so that's one good thing."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"Ability to vary the responses very easily (randomize, pick-lists, etc.)."
"In the case of the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance, there was a device terminal, which was interacting with the application via the TCP/IP protocol. Most of the tools don't support that, but we were able to achieve it using Broadcom Service Virtualization."
"The utmost importance lies in the performance of the application."
"The tool’s scalability is very good."
"API mockups, functional testing, and load testing are valuable features."
"We used to write our own solutions, from small scripts to task web services, so this saves us thousands of hours."
"The solution offers excellent integration capabilities."
"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."
"The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on."
"DevTest is pretty massive. It's hard to tell what different parts of it can be used to do different things. They should modulize it more."
"I would like to have more flexibility towards the mainframe virtualization and also in JDBC virtualization."
"CA actually releases a new version every year. We had issues with the upgrade prior to the latest one."
"I really want to see more of the "express" kind of model, where you get a little bit for free. I'd love to be able to see you be able to edit and author tests without having to be connected to a licensed server. And then, if you want to go and execute tests, then you go and connect to the server... I think it would unblock people to be able to do a lot more work from home or from remote places, where they can't really connect to the server."
"One major feature I would like to see is on the user administration part. Right now, anybody can access any of the folders and any of the projects."
"It is not a stable solution."
"They can always work on usability and making simple things simple to do. This is true of every product that deals with complexity."
"The workstation component has a very out-dated UI and is in dire need of a facelift."
"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."
"The UI should be improved."
"There are no bugs or glitches, but a few features available only in the Pro version could be made available in the open-source version. Some of the features do not necessarily need to be only available to Pro users. The data generator would be really useful for the open-source version users."
"Could integrate the graphing module for load testing."
"The current interface is unsatisfactory."
"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."
"The UI could be a bit more flexible."
"It is limited to scope and risk services only. It does have some support for JMS, but it is not out-of-the-box; you have to do some tweaks here and there."
More Broadcom Service Virtualization Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom Service Virtualization is ranked 1st in Service Virtualization with 97 reviews while ReadyAPI Test is ranked 15th in Functional Testing Tools with 31 reviews. Broadcom Service Virtualization is rated 8.2, while ReadyAPI Test is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Broadcom Service Virtualization writes "Feature-rich, easy to configure and set up, and the support is good". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI Test writes "You can achieve any complex task with this tool". Broadcom Service Virtualization is most compared with Parasoft Virtualize, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server, OpenText Service Virtualization and Tricentis Tosca, whereas ReadyAPI Test is most compared with Postman, ReadyAPI, Tricentis Tosca and Apigee.
We monitor all Service Virtualization 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.