Compare Broadcom Service Virtualization vs. IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Service Virtualization vs. IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
456,495 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"The most valuable features include the capability to use other program languages such as PLSQR, JAVA, .NET.""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 most valuable features are the recording and creating of virtual services.""There are several areas that are easily configurable."

More Broadcom Service Virtualization Pros »

"It has very easy and good validation techniques used for SWIFT, XSD, and WSDL validations.""As we have used most of the MQ stub, "MQ recording" is the most useful feature."

More IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server Pros »

Cons
"UI should be more user friendly: better usability, more testing oriented.""The workstation component has a very out-dated UI and is in dire need of a facelift.""It is not a stable solution.""I would like to have more flexibility towards the mainframe virtualization and also in JDBC virtualization."

More Broadcom Service Virtualization Cons »

"User friendliness: I would rate it somewhere around 5/10 in terms of user-friendliness. It can be simpler to build stubs and middle-ware based test cases compared to the solution given by RTVS.""Reporting: In the recent release of RCPT, the "Usage graph" feature is included, but that still needs improvements in terms of UI and timeline filtering criteria."

More IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"There are additional fees for advanced-level technical support.""I don't have the exact dollar amount, but we have spent close to $1,000,000 for a three-year agreement, for an enterprise level."

More Broadcom Service Virtualization Pricing and Cost Advice »

"IBM RTVS is not that expensive compare to other giants, but it is still much ahead of some other tool having less features.""The product has a free trial available, which has saves on the initial investment costs."

More IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
456,495 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
1st
Views
5,076
Comparisons
1,815
Reviews
4
Average Words per Review
696
Rating
8.3
3rd
Views
883
Comparisons
346
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
665
Rating
7.5
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
ITKO LISA, CA LISA, CA Service Virtualization Green Hat, IBM RTVS
Learn
Broadcom
IBM
Overview

CA Service Virtualization acts as a catalyst for DevOps by simulating constrained or unavailable systems across the software development lifecycle (SDLC). This allows developers, testers and performance teams to work in parallel to accelerate app delivery, as well as to “shift-left” the app testing to improve application quality. CA Service Virtualization was previously known as LISA, the product from the ITKO acquisition.

Testing environments are often expensive and can have limited availability. IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server helps you shift testing to the left by removing dependencies on components that are unavailable or already in use. These components are simulated at the API layer, supporting a wide variety of technologies, allowing your team to test the riskiest elements earlier in the delivery lifecycle.

Offer
Learn more about Broadcom Service Virtualization
Learn more about IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server
Sample Customers
Union Bank, Swisscom, Autotrader, KPN, ING Bank, Best Buy, American Family Insurance, TESCO, Telefonica, Molina Healthcare, California DMV, Aktia, City Index, Con-way, DirecTV, GRU Airport, Liquidnet, NAB, Nordstrom, T-Mobile, TIM Brasil, Sandhata Technologies Ltd., Qantas Airways 
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm25%
Comms Service Provider20%
Transportation Company7%
Retailer7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company48%
Financial Services Firm13%
Comms Service Provider12%
Energy/Utilities Company4%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company55%
Financial Services Firm29%
Comms Service Provider7%
Insurance Company4%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business4%
Midsize Enterprise7%
Large Enterprise89%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Service Virtualization vs. IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
456,495 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Broadcom Service Virtualization is ranked 1st in Service Virtualization with 4 reviews while IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server is ranked 3rd in Service Virtualization with 2 reviews. Broadcom Service Virtualization is rated 8.2, while IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Broadcom Service Virtualization writes "Scalable with good recording and creating of virtual services, but it's not stable and there is no support for previous versions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server writes "It helped us to build IBM MQ based stubs and automated test cases. I would like it to be more user friendly". Broadcom Service Virtualization is most compared with Micro Focus Service Virtualization, Parasoft Service Virtualization, SmartBear ServiceV Pro, Tricentis Tosca and SoapUI Pro, whereas IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server is most compared with Parasoft Service Virtualization and SmartBear ServiceV Pro. See our Broadcom Service Virtualization vs. IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server report.

See our list of best Service Virtualization vendors.

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.