We performed a comparison between CrossBrowserTesting 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."Each new session started with the live testing feature allows for a cleared browser and new experience to be able to not only see these attributes on the page clearly but also pass clean data."
"It has increased the speed of our regression testing."
"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."
"It was the perfect solution that saved us time and money to perform web viewing tests on real devices, which allowed our team to correct multiple failures in devices."
"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."
"The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."
"I can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the ready-to-use assertions and filters which can perform the validation. If we want to filter out any value, the filters are available. Apart from that database integration, if you want to go ahead and perform validation in the database layer it is possible with the ready-to-use feature available. The execution and reporting are rich features."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The feature that allows you to import an API collection or a project is valuable."
"The dashboards are very good and consolidate all of the tests that you are performing with the client."
"This solution is very intuitive. Once you finish your first few testing cases, you can change several parameters and create lots of testing cases. You could use the same testing cases for different purposes such as automation, performance and screen testing."
"The two most valuable features we use are the functional test and the security test."
"It is the best solution you can get across the globe for API, test automation, and API penetration testing."
"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 would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."
"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved."
"There is a lot of room for improvement, mainly from the point of view of integrating ReadyAPI into the CI pipelines, and also the scripting aspect into Bitbucket."
"The solution is made up of multiple tools, and the one additional feature we'd like to have is load testing."
"If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful."
"The UI should be flexible. Currently, the UI isn't."
"ReadyAPI can improve because it is limited to only SOAP and REST services. They should update the solution to include more protocols so that other people are not limited to SOAP and REST services. Other than would be able to utilize it."
"To generate a test suite in API, I had to create a separate one each time because otherwise it was just override the test. Each API had to be added separately. I thought I could just have one and then create different methods, but I had to add each API separately to create the test for that. That is an area that could be improved."
"Performance and memory management both need to be improved because other solutions use less memory for the same amount of data."
Earn 20 points
CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 27th in Functional Testing Tools while ReadyAPI is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews. CrossBrowserTesting is rated 9.0, while ReadyAPI is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of CrossBrowserTesting writes "Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems". 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". CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with BrowserStack, Bitbar, Tricentis Tosca, LambdaTest and Sauce Labs, 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.
