Most Helpful Review
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The ease of use is superior to anything on the market. It's very easy to integrate. We've been very impressed with the tool. Because we primarily use the configuration with SAP, the integration is pretty seamless. But we have used our own in-house VB app as well, and it's worked very well with that."
"We love the Capture 2.0 feature. It seems to work very well."
"The ability to work with the data, with recordsets, and plug those into the scripts is very easy and very powerful. We use it extensively."
"It's script-free, which is really important for our end users because we are usually dealing with colleagues who are not developers and who do not always have the technical background of developing and scripting. It's very useful that there is a nice UI and the tool is script-free."
"One big advantage of Worksoft Certify is its integration with SAP Solution Manager..."
"It is very user-friendly with an appealing UI, unlike a lot of other automation tools that we have evaluated. The fact that it can be used to across SAP and non-SAP applications (including web-based apps) is a big advantage. Using Certify Process Capture functionality has helped in hassle free test design creation, without the need to spend any extra effort to capture test steps and screenshots. The integration elements across HPE ALM and Solution Manager also work well."
"If we write a new test that's 80 percent the same as an existing test, it is pretty straightforward to reuse the steps from existing tests for our new tests and build upon them."
"It is very easy to maintain. With scripts, I can change one line and in one step. Whatever I want, I can do. I don't need to be an expert to use it."
"It has helped us simulate heavy load situations so we can fix performance issues ahead of time."
"BlazeMeter has allowed us to simplify and speed up our load testing process."
"I really like the recording because when I use the JMeter the scripting a lot of recording it takes me a lot of time to get used to. The BlazeMeter the recording is quick."
"They have good support documentation and when we have contacted them, they helped to guide us."
"The interface is ok and they have the ability to re-load tests so that you can reuse them."
"The dashboards are very good and consolidate all of the tests that you are performing with the client."
"The most valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it is user-friendly."
"It has the ability to combine it with different CI/CD tools."
"A single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and service actualization."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."
"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 learn how to use it."
"In the past, when we've tried to automate some of our web apps, it has not been as robust. If there were one thing that could be improved, it's interaction with web applications. The issue we were running into is that it was harder to identify the objects than it is with some of the other architectured applications."
"The definitions for the objects need to be automated. They need to be recognized automatically by Worksoft Certify instead of changing them back and forth manually. This is also something that Worksoft is currently working on."
"Our interactions with technical support has not been the best always and there is room for improvement especially with respect to the time taken to respond to cases. However, with the right contacts and reasonable escalations we have always managed to get quick attention on our cases."
"One feature that we have been asking for has been to treat tests as code and store the source code for tests in a configuration management tool. Right now, for version control of testing, it's all internally within the tool. If we have a test of a business process and want to revive that test, our methodology now is purely manual work. We go into the tool, create a copy of the existing test, and call the next one: v2. Now, we have two of them and the only way you can tell them apart is by its naming convention."
"I would like to see the impact analysis integrated with the performance testing tool. We have multiple tools doing multiple items. I would like to have one common tool."
"We are looking for some enhancements on the Capture 2.0 tool. This would give us the ability to control it directly, like we could with Capture 1.0. Right now, Capture 2.0 doesn't really work for our Business Analysts."
"There was a change to Capture 2.0. In the end, there have been some challenges with the newer version. Therefore, the company testers, the local ones, do not want to use Capture 2.0."
"When it is unstable, there will be times when a test that we are running in Certify will just stop, and it will say, "Aborted." There will be errors. There will be no explanation as to why it happens. It has now happened maybe one out of 20 times. When it happens, I just tell our QA team to stop Certify and restart it, hoping we don't see it again."
"My only complaint is about the technical support, where sometimes I found that they would not read into and understand the details of my question before answering it."
"A possible improvement could be the integration with APM tools."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"I would like to see a better dashboard for monitoring in the next release of this solution."
"If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful."
"Performance and memory management both need to be improved because other solutions use less memory for the same amount of data."
"The performance in some cases needs improvement. Sometimes it requires too many resources."
"Lacking flexibility of adding more custom verification for security testing."
"The reporting is not very robust and needs to be improved."
"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."
"Version control does not work well."
Pricing and Cost Advice
"We would purchase more licenses right now if they were cheaper. Pricing is a little bit of a hindrance."
"It is expensive compared to some of the other automation tools in the market. However, the benefits and ROI has proved that it has been a good investment."
"The initial upfront cost in terms of licenses, plus all the money that we spent developing tests, has proven it's worth. Now, we can do a regression test suite in ten days as opposed to sixteen weeks."
"Our ROI is primarily a reduction in testing time. The testing, when we were doing it manually, was 30 to 40 percent of the project's cost."
"We ended up buying too many licenses. They were very good at selling it to us, and probably oversold it a little. We bought 45 licenses and have never used more than twenty. However, they gave us a pretty significant discount on the bigger license, so it made sense for us to buy enough that we wouldn't have to go back and ask for more."
"We could use Certify to do robotic process automation, which is basically running a process on your correction system instead of your test system. Therefore, we may do that in the future."
"By using automation, it reduced about 75 percent of the time when compared to any other tool."
"Saving money and better quality, these are the benefits of Certify."
"The licensing fees are billed on a monthly basis and they cost approximately $100 for the basic plan."
"This is a cheap solution when you consider the money that will be saved in testing."
"The cost of a license is probably around $1,000 to $2,000. Accounting is done by my leadership. I am more into implementations and making sure all things and processes are taken care of and the frameworks are maintained and managed."
"There are costs in addition to the licensing fee. For example, if you want to add the load testing you would pay more."
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: It does allow for good reusability. When it's designed properly and utilized properly, we can put things in a way that… more »
Top Answer: The licensing is yearly.
Top Answer: I really like the recording because when I use the JMeter the scripting a lot of recording it takes me a lot of time to… more »
Top Answer: In terms of improvement, I would like it to have the ability to customize reports.
Top Answer: It has the ability to combine it with different CI/CD tools.
Top Answer: The performance in some cases needs improvement. Sometimes it requires too many resources.
Compared 32% of the time.
Compared 25% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 33% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Compared 73% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Also Known As
|JMeter Cloud||Ready API|
|Worksoft is a leading global provider of automation software for high-velocity business process testing and discovery. Enterprises worldwide use Worksoft intelligent automation to innovate faster, lower technology risk, reduce costs, improve quality, and deeply understand their real end-to-end business processes. Global 5000 companies across all industries choose Worksoft for high speed process discovery and functional testing of digital, web, cloud, mobile, big data, and dozens of enterprise applications, including SAP, Oracle, and Salesforce.com.||CA BlazeMeter ensures delivery of high-performance software by enabling DevOps teams to quickly and easily run open-source-based performance tests against any mobile app, website or API at massive scale to validate performance at every stage of software delivery. The rapidly growing CA BlazeMeter community has more than 100,000 developers and includes prominent global brands such as Adobe, Atlassian, Gap, NBC Universal, Pfizer and Walmart as customers. Founded in 2011, the company is headquartered in Palo Alto, Calif., with its research and development in Tel Aviv.|
ReadyAPI combines the power of SoapUI Pro, LoadUI Pro, ServiceV, and API Monitoring in AlertSite into a single pane of glass. From functional testing, to performance testing to post-deployment monitoring, SmartBear’s API tools help you to deliver accurate, fast, and secure APIs.
Learn more about Worksoft Certify
Learn more about BlazeMeter
Learn more about ReadyAPI
|Kraft, Reliant Energy, Richemont, Applied Materials, Siemens PLM, Mosaic, Dow Corning, ebay, IBM, Accenture, Fortis BC, US Government, Southwest Airlines||DIRECTV, GAP, MIT, NBCUniversal, Pfizer, StubHub||Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)|
Consumer Goods Company13%
Computer Software Company42%
Comms Service Provider8%
Computer Software Company40%
Comms Service Provider10%
Computer Software Company39%
Comms Service Provider12%
Financial Services Firm5%
BlazeMeter is ranked 7th in Performance Testing Tools with 6 reviews while ReadyAPI is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 8 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.6, while ReadyAPI is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Enables us to monitor our application instances as well as our database to see where the bottlenecks are". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI writes " A great single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and service actualization". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, Neotys NeoLoad and Load Impact, whereas ReadyAPI is most compared with SoapUI Pro, Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca and Parasoft SOAtest. See our BlazeMeter vs. ReadyAPI report.
We monitor all Performance 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.