• Home
  • BrowserStack vs. IBM Rational Service Tester

BrowserStack vs IBM Rational Service Tester comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
BrowserStack Logo

BrowserStack

Read 25 BrowserStack reviews
8,712 views|6,797 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
IBM Logo

IBM Rational Service Tester

79 views|71 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Download the complete report
Buyer's Guide
Functional Testing Tools
April 2024
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and IBM Rational Service Tester based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: April 2024).
Download the complete report
768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Anonymous User
Great browser testing across platforms but issues with stability
BrowserStack has allowed us to do tests to cover criteria we couldn't do previously.
Use IBM Rational Service Tester?
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "This solution costs less than competing products."
  • "The price is fine."
  • "There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
  • "BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
  • "The price of BrowserStack is high."
  • "Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
  • "My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
  • "As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."

    • More BrowserStack Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    See Which Vendors Are Best For You
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    See Recommendations
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    What do you like most about BrowserStack?
    Top Answer:It is a scalable solution.
    Read all 14 answers   →
    What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?
    Top Answer:With respect to pricing, they are a bit expensive. I would rate the licensing model a six out of ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap. So, the price could be a bit decreased.
    Read all 10 answers   →
    What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
    Top Answer:The issue with the product stems from the fact that when we try to do a single or multiple login on multiple browsers for simulation in scenarios where users use Chrome, Mozilla, and Edge, all… more »
    Read all 14 answers   →
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    5th
    out of 47 in Functional Testing Tools
    Views
    8,712
    Comparisons
    6,797
    Reviews
    12
    Average Words per Review
    353
    Rating
    7.9
    43rd
    out of 47 in Functional Testing Tools
    Views
    79
    Comparisons
    71
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Rational Service Tester
    Learn More
    BrowserStack
    IBM
    Overview
    BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.
    IBM Rational Service Tester for SOA Quality is a functional and regression testing tool that enables code-free testing of non-GUI services. Rational Service Tester for SOA Quality helps software delivery teams ensure the functionality, interoperability and performance of service-oriented architecture (SOA) software and web services. Rational Service Tester for SOA Quality helps software teams perform and deliver quality assurance.
    Sample Customers
    Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
    IMM, ADP, Bangkok Hospital, Nice Céte d'Azur, Durham Police Department, Whogohost Ltd., Skypicker, Infinity Computers and Communications Company, Getin Noble Bank S.A., KPJ Healthcare Berhad
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company55%
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Marketing Services Firm9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Retailer7%
    No Data Available
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business30%
    Midsize Enterprise26%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise67%
    No Data Available
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    April 2024
    Download Free Report
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: April 2024.
    DOWNLOAD NOW
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    BrowserStack is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while IBM Rational Service Tester is ranked 43rd in Functional Testing Tools. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while IBM Rational Service Tester is rated 0.0. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users". On the other hand, BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, CrossBrowserTesting and Bitbar, whereas IBM Rational Service Tester is most compared with .

    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.