We performed a comparison between ReadyAPI and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The performance testing capabilities are very good."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities."
"The Excel sheet feature is good."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"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."
"The interface is ok and they have the ability to re-load tests so that you can reuse them."
"It has the ability to combine it with different CI/CD tools."
"The most valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it is user-friendly."
"The solution is easy to use and they have also integrated with Microsoft."
"It is very easy to use. You can handle a lot of things together at once in one package, which is a good point for us."
"User-friendly ID and direct integration with GitHub are the most valuable."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a scalable solution."
"The whole suite is made for .NET development."
"Customization is the most powerful feature of this product."
"The user interface is very friendly."
"What I like most about Visual Studio Test Professional is the way people publish templates and publish integration."
"Version control does not work well."
"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."
"Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions."
"It is challenging doing upgrades and patches because sometimes the environmental variables or suits in the projects get erased."
"There is room for improvement in ReadyAPI, particularly in the user interface."
"The reporting is not very robust and needs to be improved."
"It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today. Other solutions have an in-built mechanism where I can directly and easily connect. An API is more around a user submitting a request on the frontend. It then hits the backend, puts the data, and responds back. If I am hitting MongoDB or NoSQL databases, I do not have ready-made inbuilt solutions in ReadyAPI that can easily help me in automating it faster. In our organization, we deal with NoSQL databases, and therefore, we need Groovy. We just cannot have a connector from ReadyAPI to do that. I have to write Groovy scripts. If you have themes that are predominantly using MongoDB, it leads to more maintenance and support activity because we are introducing more code into our commission. In terms of additional features, it can have cloud support. This is one of the things where we are getting into cloud support. We'll see how it works, but it is one of the doubts that we still have."
"Many users will consider this solution expensive compared to the layout. It is more expensive than other solutions."
"The pricing of this solution should be lowered."
"The solution can improve the startup time."
"It is hard to learn, and you need to invest time to understand it."
"Enhancing the support for web application testing and load performance would be an improvement."
"The service right now is far too expensive. You need to pay per user."
"The solution's deployment is not very easy and should be made easier."
"The solution's documentation could be improved for beginners."
"It is not good in terms of performance. When you open Visual Studio, you have to wait for a while to process your code. It uses a lot of resources and has a lot of features. If we could disable some of the features, it would be lighter and faster to use. Nowadays, for some of the projects, we use VS Code for JavaScript or Python. VS Code is very light and easy to use, whereas, in Visual Studio, we have to wait because it takes time to compile or run a project. It has a lot of competitors in terms of performance, such as Intelligent ID. Intelligent ID is very easy to use. It has many features, and it is lighter to use than Visual Studio. In terms of error handling, sometimes, it shows an error before you finish your code, which can be improved. It would be good if it has a version for Linux. I use VS Code on Linux, but I am not sure if Visual Studio has a version for Linux."
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
ReadyAPI is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 7th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews. ReadyAPI is rated 7.8, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, ReadyAPI Test and SmartBear TestComplete, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and TestRail. See our ReadyAPI vs. Visual Studio Test Professional report.
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.
