We performed a comparison between Bitbar and ReadyAPI based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."Ability to use different frameworks."
"Game testing and the API for apps are good."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It's great for those that don't have as much exposure to programming."
"The two most valuable features we use are the functional test and the security test."
"It has the ability to combine it with different CI/CD tools."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."
"The great thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a wide variety of functions. You can test any API that you come across. You are not limited to one type of API. It supports many APIs."
"It's easy to automate for more data-driven testing."
"ReadyAPI's best features are that it's user-friendly and its behavior-driven development is flexible."
"Their pricing structure is complicated and can be improved."
"Lacking capability options that can be directly integrated."
"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."
"Many users will consider this solution expensive compared to the layout. It is more expensive than other solutions."
"ReadyAPI's customer support isn't that great, particularly their response time."
"Version control does not work well."
"What needs improvement in ReadyAPI is its load testing feature because there was a hiccup when my team performed some load testing on the tool. My team had meetings with the ReadyAPI team and tried to get that issue fixed, but it still hasn't improved. This is a shortcoming of the tool, especially when you compare it with HP LoadRunner."
"I don't like how they don't have a clear way to manage tests between multiple projects."
"I would like to see a better dashboard for monitoring in the next release of this solution."
"The initial setup could be less complex."
Earn 20 points
Bitbar is ranked 26th in Functional Testing Tools while ReadyAPI is ranked 7th in Functional Testing Tools with 33 reviews. Bitbar is rated 7.0, while ReadyAPI is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Bitbar writes "It's helped me when I've been short of devices and want to test whether the application will work on a specific device or not". On the other hand, 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". Bitbar is most compared with BrowserStack, SmartBear TestComplete, CrossBrowserTesting, Sauce Labs and LambdaTest, whereas ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, ReadyAPI Test, Tricentis Tosca and SmartBear TestComplete.
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.