OpenText Business Processing Testing vs ReadyAPI comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
OpenText Logo
185 views|113 comparisons
83% willing to recommend
SmartBear Logo
3,008 views|1,685 comparisons
85% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText Business Processing Testing 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.
To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: April 2024).
768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively.""This solution is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."

More OpenText Business Processing Testing Pros →

"It can create stress tests very fast, and some features help you do it fast.""The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the drag-and-drop options and the integration with versioning tool solutions, such as Git.""I haven't seen any other tool that offers both types of tests. This is very helpful for us, and it's one of the main reasons why we chose this service.""The dashboards are very good and consolidate all of the tests that you are performing with the client.""The initial setup of ReadyAPI is straightforward.""ReadyAPI's best features are user-friendliness, smooth integration with Postman, the speed of creating test cases, and integration with customer data.""The great thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a wide variety of functions. You can test any API that you come across. You are not limited to one type of API. It supports many APIs.""It is the best solution you can get across the globe for API, test automation, and API penetration testing."

More ReadyAPI Pros →

Cons
"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository.""There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."

More OpenText Business Processing Testing Cons →

"The Property Transfer capability could be more user friendly because it is a bit difficult to understand.""I don't like how they don't have a clear way to manage tests between multiple projects.""Sometimes, if I changed something in ReadyAPI, it would not quickly pick up the change. It used to give me the same error repeatedly, and when I closed the application completely and restarted it, it would pick up that change.""In terms of features, I have already raised different change requests on the ReadyAPI side. One of the largest functions I've requested is the validation of the payload for the REST APIs.""If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful.""Can be improved by including an inherent feature for UI automation.""The UI should be flexible. Currently, the UI isn't.""The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved."

More ReadyAPI Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
  • "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."
  • "The price of the solution has been fine."
  • "The price was around $6,000 for one license, but I don't remember exactly. It is definitely expensive. Our organization was planning on having multiple licenses for this year."
  • "For each license, they charge the same amount, which is less than $1,000 for each desktop license."
  • "The thing with ReadyAPI is that you have to buy different licenses for different purposes."
  • "We have approximately 12 licenses in place. There are other solutions that are more expensive than ReadyAPI that have more features, but if the scope of the project is limited to SOAP and REST service, then this is the best option."
  • More ReadyAPI Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer:The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities.
    Top Answer:The cost of the license is quite high. The licensing cost for ReadyAPI, at least for the current license I have, covers both general and security testing.
    Top Answer:There is room for improvement in ReadyAPI, particularly in the user interface. I prefer working with multiple windows or tabs, like in SoapUI, rather than the current single-window setup. It becomes… more »
    Ranking
    37th
    Views
    185
    Comparisons
    113
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    8th
    Views
    3,008
    Comparisons
    1,685
    Reviews
    23
    Average Words per Review
    654
    Rating
    7.6
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus Business Process Testing, Business Process Testing, HPE Business Process Testing
    Ready API
    Learn More
    Overview

    OpenText Business Processing Testing (BPT) test framework software will help you move from one-off manual testing and ad hoc functional automated testing to an architected approach with a library of reusable test components. BPT accelerates the move to component-based testing with an integrated test framework approach to creating a repository of reusable test modules that allow for changes to be made once, then propagated across your distributed agile teams to all affected tests.

    ReadyAPI is an all-in-one automated testing platform that allows teams to create, manage, and execute automated functional, security, and performance tests in one centralized interface.

    ReadyAPI Features

    Some of ReadyAPI’s key features include:

    • Continuous integration
    • Comprehensive dashboard
    • API discovery
    • Central, standardized reporting function
    • Plugin architecture
    • ReadyAPI Projects
    • Multiple options for scripting to create functional, load, or security tests

    ReadyAPI Benefits

    Some of the benefits of using ReadyAPI include:

    • Easy and flexible test creation and execution: ReadyAPI has visual editors and wizards that make testing easy, saving time and simplifying onboarding.

    • Test APIs continuously: With ReadyAPI you can run consistent tests on local environments, Docker containers, or other distributed staging environments.

    • Team friendly: ReadyAPI enables software teams with the ability to easily share testing projects and artifacts, share licenses between team members, and report issues directly from the testing IDE.

    • Powerful, data-driven testing capabilities: With ReadyAPI, you can save time by checking for numerous real world conditions.

    • Supports multiple specifications, schemas, and protocols: ReadyAPI includes legacy SOAP services, microservices powered by Apache Kafka, and mainstream REST services, as well as IoT use cases leveraging MQTT. It allows you to test and virtualize the most popular API protocols and also to import APIs from specifications and schemas instantly.

    Reviews from Real Users

    Below are some reviews and helpful feedback written by Dell EMC Unity users.

    PeerSpot user Vallalarasu P., Test Architect at a tech services company, states, “ReadyAPI is one of the best tools for API testing because they have made a single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and also service actualization. We also have virtual work that can be an add-in within ReadyAPI. For integration for CACD, they have something called TestEngine, which can also be an add-on for ReadyAPI. We use Python request library and things like that but if you're a bigger organization with hundreds of APIs, then ReadyAPI is a one-stop solution for complete API testing. If you consider TestComplete and other products for an equivalent outcome, you might get something nearly comparable, butReadyAPI is the outstanding product.”

    An IT Manager at an insurance company says the solution has “Fast automation, less coding, and is pretty lightweight. 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."

    Balamurugan A., Manager at a financial services firm, comments, “We like the user interface. The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools.

    They have interfaces with our performance tools, so we were able to leverage all of these integrations and plugins. It is very good from an integrative solution standpoint.”

    Sample Customers
    Migros Bank AG
    Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
    Top Industries
    No Data Available
    REVIEWERS
    Insurance Company25%
    Financial Services Firm25%
    Healthcare Company13%
    Logistics Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Computer Software Company17%
    Insurance Company9%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise71%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise71%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise68%
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    April 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: April 2024.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText Business Processing Testing is ranked 37th in Functional Testing Tools while ReadyAPI is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 33 reviews. OpenText Business Processing Testing is rated 7.8, while ReadyAPI is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of OpenText Business Processing Testing writes "Excellent usability, but the solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with their ALM tool". 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". OpenText Business Processing Testing is most compared with , 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.