Compare CA Service Virtualization vs. IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server

CA Service Virtualization is ranked 1st in Service Virtualization with 11 reviews while IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server which is ranked 5th in Service Virtualization with 2 reviews. CA Service Virtualization is rated 8.2, while IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CA Service Virtualization writes "Supports multiple protocols, enables us to virtualize calls to third-party vendors and save". 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". CA Service Virtualization is most compared with Parasoft Service Virtualization, Micro Focus Service Virtualization and SmartBear ServiceV Pro, whereas IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server is most compared with CA Service Virtualization, Micro Focus Service Virtualization and Parasoft Service Virtualization.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Technologies, SmartBear, Parasoft and others in Service Virtualization. Updated: July 2019.
353,345 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.I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable.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.It is definitely scalable.We have been using it extensively for the shift left process and testing. It helps us to accelerate and virtualize services and assets that we don't have. It enables to test faster.We have had developers produce code later than we wanted to, but we've had some other stuff that was dependent on that. So what we were able to do was virtualize these assets and then go forward with our developer and not have to wait for these additional services to be available.We are able to quickly scale our requests. We have tested across thousands of requests. We have had no problems so far.You can have a lot of different people with different technologies use the tool, without any programming experience at all, all the way up to people who can program. And then, the more technical that you are, the more programming you have, the more you're able to customize the tool.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

Cons
UI should be more user friendly: better usability, more testing oriented.I would rate the tech support a nine out of ten. They need more knowledge about the connectivity to DevOps orchestration.Needs some additional lightweight, portable elements.​From a reporting perspective I think we would like to have a more user-friendly approach.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.We had to implement an external service catalog. We put it in ServiceNow. I would like to see an integrated service catalog.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.CA actually releases a new version every year. We had issues with the upgrade prior to the latest one.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
353,345 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
1st
Views
30,022
Comparisons
3,095
Reviews
12
Average Words per Review
532
Avg. Rating
8.4
5th
Views
2,655
Comparisons
668
Reviews
2
Average Words per Review
722
Avg. Rating
7.5
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
ITKO LISA, CA LISAGreen Hat, IBM RTVS
Learn
CA Technologies
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 CA 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 Provider21%
Retailer8%
Manufacturing Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm62%
Individual & Family Service11%
Insurance Company8%
Comms Service Provider5%
No Data Available
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business2%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise89%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business1%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise79%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Technologies, SmartBear, Parasoft and others in Service Virtualization. Updated: July 2019.
353,345 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email