

BrowserStack and ReadyAPI are key competitors in software testing. BrowserStack has an edge in usability and accessibility, providing seamless integration, whereas ReadyAPI excels in API testing and data-driven testing capabilities for comprehensive testing needs.
Features: BrowserStack provides live cross-browser testing, automated testing on numerous real devices, and seamless integration with development pipelines. ReadyAPI offers robust API testing functionalities, integration with CI/CD tools, and advanced test scenario creation capabilities.
Room for Improvement: BrowserStack could enhance its API testing support, offer more detailed reporting options, and improve performance analysis features. ReadyAPI could simplify its setup process, enhance its user interface for accessibility, and expand its mobile testing functionalities.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: BrowserStack offers straightforward cloud-based deployment with minimal setup, alongside responsive customer service. ReadyAPI requires a more complex on-premises setup, with extensive customization options, but may require more resources for deployment and support.
Pricing and ROI: BrowserStack's pricing reflects good ROI for browser compatibility testing on varied devices. ReadyAPI, while more expensive initially, provides significant ROI through powerful API testing tools, justified for high-quality API performance focus.
Pipeline executions that used to take eight hours have been reduced to one hour, enhancing continuous deployment and providing quicker feedback cycles.
I think its biggest benefit is how it integrates with our CI/CD, not necessarily giving access to developers for test devices.
I have seen a return on investment with BrowserStack, specifically a 50% reduction in human capacity.
BrowserStack customer support is excellent, with knowledgeable staff assisting throughout onboarding, setup, and understanding our needs to provide tailored solutions.
SmartBear had an ALM tool that helped manage project documentation, including Jira-related specifications, test plans, and test cases.
BrowserStack's scalability is enhanced by its auto-scaling capabilities on AWS.
They reproduce the same scenario, and then we create the bug ticket for them to fix.
I rate ReadyAPI between five to six for scalability due to complexities associated with scripting.
ReadyAPI's performance testing capabilities can impact API scalability assessments.
BrowserStack is quite stable for me because it offers many different devices, is always up to date, and has a nice user interface with good user experience.
Sometimes there is slowness in the network, especially when working with AWS-based hosting.
Once all configurations and preparations are done, it is very stable.
BrowserStack is very expensive and they keep increasing their cost, which is absolutely ridiculous, especially when someone like LambdaTest is coming through for literal thousands of dollars less, with the same services.
Going forward, one way BrowserStack could improve is by incorporating AI concepts to create tests automatically from provided URLs or user intentions, generating scripts without needing users to write automation scripts.
I think false positives are an area where BrowserStack can improve, as I have often seen things working fine on actual devices, but on BrowserStack devices, issues arise due to network slowness or AWS region connectivity problems that cause lag.
One issue I found with ReadyAPI is related to event listeners compared to JMeter or SoapUI.
I'm considering the use of AWS and its Lambda functionalities prepared by the vendor.
pricing was that it was a bit on the higher side, around three hundred dollars per user per month.
The pricing of ReadyAPI is reasonable, considering its functionality compared to other tools in the market.
Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs.
The device farm is one of the positive impacts we have seen from using BrowserStack. We get to run our automation against their full suite of devices, which alleviates the uplift of manual testing.
BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by helping us reduce the human capacity by 50%, with that reduction mostly being in manual testing efforts.
BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization primarily through time savings because it is very easy to use and replicates physical devices for testing, which is crucial since we usually do not have physical devices.
It also aids in faster feedback to developers, allowing them to implement developments in a sprint without the need for extensive testing afterwards, thus improving our time to market metrics.
ReadyAPI is valuable for web service automation and allowing us to generate test cases and automate processes.
I consider ReadyAPI a cost-effective solution because it covers three verticals without needing to purchase separate tools for security, performance, or functional testing.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| BrowserStack | 8.1% |
| ReadyAPI | 1.6% |
| Other | 90.3% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 10 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 8 |
| Large Enterprise | 14 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 5 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 5 |
| Large Enterprise | 28 |
BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.
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:
ReadyAPI Benefits
Some of the benefits of using ReadyAPI include:
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.”
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.