We performed a comparison between BlazeMeter and ReadyAPI Test 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 extensibility that the tool offers across environments and teams is valuable."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"I really like the recording because when I use the JMeter the scripting a lot of recording it takes me a lot of time to get used to. The BlazeMeter the recording is quick."
"It supports any number of features and has a lot of tutorials."
"It is a stable solution. When we compare BlazeMeter with other tools in the market, I can say that the solution's overall performance has also been very good in our company."
"The baseline comparison in BlazeMeter is very easy, especially considering the different tests that users can easily compare."
"The on-the-fly test data improved our testing productivity a lot. The new test data features changed how we test the applications because there are different things we can do. We can use mock data or real data. We can also build data based on different formats."
"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."
"The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"SoapUI Pro is a good tool when it comes to API design and orchestration. Additionally, it is beneficial for functional and for performance testing."
"Using SoapUI's automation suites to run all our test cases saved us a lot of time. Running 300 test cases takes about three to four days. When you automate all that, it takes only two to three hours."
"ReadyAPI has the power to enrich all the technical work. You can achieve any complex task using ReadyAPI. I can also do UI automation with ReadyAPI. In a few test cases, we want to check the API and the equivalent UI. I download a job and write a piece of Groovy or Java code. It's almost the same in ReadyAPI. I can do that in a single test case. ReadyAPI is a powerful tool because you can do anything you want, but only you need to download the right set of jobs and produce the right set of code."
"It clearly makes it easy to test APIs based on the SOAP protocol. We are a logistics company, and we have lots of tracking calls coming in. We provide APIs for tracking services, and it makes sense for us to use SoapUI to test them thoroughly."
"It's a very simple solution to use."
"The solution offers excellent integration capabilities."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"The reporting capabilities could be improved."
"Integration is one of the things lacking in BlazeMeter compared to some newer options."
"Version controlling of the test cases and the information, the ability to compare the current version and the previous version within Runscope would be really nice. The history shows who made the changes, but it doesn't compare the changes."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports."
"Having more options for customization would be helpful."
"The performance could be better. When reviewing finished cases, it sometimes takes a while for BlazeMeter to load. That has improved recently, but it's still a problem with unusually large test cases. The same goes for editing test cases. When editing test cases, it starts to take a long time to open those action groups and stuff."
"I don't think I can generate a JMX file unless I run JMeter, which is one of my concerns when it comes to BlazeMeter."
"I find that I'm fighting with the opportunities to order requests."
"ReadyAPI Test needs to improve its reporting. While reports provide essential information when issues arise, or tests fail, having more graphical representations directly within the reports would be beneficial. It needs to improve stability and scalability as well. The tool's support is slow, and takes months to reach a solution."
"There aren't any plugins for UI automation. You need to make a custom code and download a job to put into the libraries. If it were panelized, then it would be straightforward. It should be in a panel of the tools, so you can add those tools as your test step in your test cases."
"Automation features are not user-friendly."
"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."
"The current interface is unsatisfactory."
"There are no bugs or glitches, but a few features available only in the Pro version could be made available in the open-source version. Some of the features do not necessarily need to be only available to Pro users. The data generator would be really useful for the open-source version users."
"SoapUI would benefit from some more customization abilities. It's a good interface, but it would be nice if they added the ability to build custom dashboards where the user can do their own bar graphs and pie charts."
BlazeMeter is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 41 reviews while ReadyAPI Test is ranked 15th in Functional Testing Tools with 31 reviews. BlazeMeter is rated 8.2, while ReadyAPI Test is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI Test writes "You can achieve any complex task with this tool". BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and BrowserStack, whereas ReadyAPI Test is most compared with Postman, Broadcom Service Virtualization, ReadyAPI, Tricentis Tosca and Apigee. See our BlazeMeter vs. ReadyAPI Test 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.
