Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Broadcom Service Virtualization vs ReadyAPI Virtualization comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Broadcom Service Virtualiza...
Ranking in Service Virtualization
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ReadyAPI Virtualization
Ranking in Service Virtualization
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the Service Virtualization category, the mindshare of Broadcom Service Virtualization is 26.2%, down from 36.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Virtualization is 17.5%, up from 10.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Service Virtualization Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Broadcom Service Virtualization26.2%
ReadyAPI Virtualization17.5%
Other56.3%
Service Virtualization
 

Featured Reviews

DM
Senior Project Manager at Infosys
Can be used for the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance
We use it for the virtualization of third-party APIs for performance testing. Our second use case is related to the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance, which is used for insurance clients In the case of the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party…
Venkata Yedida - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Good RESTful API support and performs well, but customization is difficult and time-consuming
My advice for anyone who is considering this product is that it is mainly for RESTful calls. If somebody is using Swagger APIs or some RESTful calls as part of the specification that they want to virtualize, then this tool can be a good choice. Also, if they want to virtualize a GUI tool, then it is good. In general, this is a good product but I think that the user experience has to be improved. There's just a lot of manual work that has to be done with scripting. This should be reduced to make it a more seamless experience for the user. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"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."
"The ability to create virtual services and deploy them as Docker containers, and include them in our Jenkins build pipelines, is a valuable feature."
"CA Service Virtualization has helped us advance the development cycle when third-party interfaces are not available to us."
"You can create virtual services from a live recording or convert raw traffic into request/response pairs."
"Scalability has actually worked well and we are able to bring it to multiple environments."
"It is definitely scalable."
"Ability to vary the responses very easily (randomize, pick-lists, etc.)."
"We had a number of back-end services that were not available during testing times. What this had allowed us to do is get our early life testing done while those services are not available."
"The technical support is good."
"Features, such as using Groovy scripts for generating dynamic response, which read data out of Excel sheets and one-click deployment are really nice."
"Discovery option to create virtual services."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"ServiceV Pro enabled our organization to deliver an end-to-end solution by virtualizing external systems, which was easy to implement and provided for a lot of flexibility."
"Ties-in with the rest of the SoapUI platform and its ability to record traffic and create a virtual endpoint."
"In times of DevOps, where continuous delivery and deployment is progressing at such a fast pace, ServiceV Pro has emerged as an add-on for enhancing our API product finish."
 

Cons

"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."
"The workstation component has a very out-dated UI and is in dire need of a facelift."
"It is not a stable solution."
"Needs some additional lightweight, portable elements."
"We had to implement an external service catalog. We put it in ServiceNow. I would like to see an integrated service catalog."
"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."
"UI should be more user friendly: better usability, more testing oriented."
"More examples of portal-based virtualization."
"Greater capacity to create Virtual APIs based on HAR files or wireshark recordings."
"ServiceV still has some bug in the tools, such as structure of the project, integration, and combination with different tools present."
"It needs support for a wider set of protocols."
"The effort required to utilize the capabilities/usage of ServiceV Pro looks like the one area where we could have some further improvements"
"The solution does not allow you to export APIs to the cURL command like Postman."
"Requires more documentation or videos with examples, which is easily understood by the new users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are additional fees for advanced-level technical support."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"There is a yearly licensing cost, and I would give it a four out of five."
"I don't have the exact dollar amount, but we have spent close to $1,000,000 for a three-year agreement, for an enterprise level."
"This product is worth the cost."
"Be updated with the latest offerings that the tool provides so as to avoid any clashes with issues, like licensing."
"Pricing is alright, however more options would be desirable for a fairly new product like ServiceV."
"Ability to have general IT staff enable developers using this software as opposed to more expensive vendors or developers building their own solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
874,056 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
11%
Performing Arts
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise98
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
 

Also Known As

ITKO LISA, CA LISA, CA Service Virtualization
ServiceV Pro
 

Overview

 

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, 
Zurich Insurance Group
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom Service Virtualization vs. ReadyAPI Virtualization and other solutions. Updated: November 2025.
874,056 professionals have used our research since 2012.