BrowserStack vs ReadyAPI Test comparison

BrowserStack and SmartBear are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. BrowserStack is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.3, while SmartBear is ranked #21 with an average rating of 7.3. BrowserStack holds a 10.4% mindshare in FT, compared to SmartBear’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of BrowserStack users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of SmartBear users who would recommend it.

BrowserStack

Read 25 BrowserStack reviews

5,813 Views
4,866 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

ReadyAPI Test

Read 31 ReadyAPI Test reviews

380 Views
324 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

BrowserStack

ReadyAPI Test

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

ReadyAPI Test and BrowserStack operate in the testing tools market. ReadyAPI Test has an edge in API and web service testing, while BrowserStack excels in device and cross-browser compatibility.

Features: ReadyAPI Test offers comprehensive testing for SOAP, REST, and JDBC services with easy setup and Groovy scripting. It provides strong API integration and performance testing capabilities. BrowserStack supports extensive browser and platform testing across mobile and desktop devices, with valuable local testing and geolocation features.

Room for Improvement: ReadyAPI Test faces challenges in test organization, bug fixing, and memory usage. Users desire better IDE integration and flexible licensing. BrowserStack experiences connectivity issues, slow performance, and requires more framework integration. Both products would benefit from improved pricing structures and reporting capabilities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: ReadyAPI Test is mainly on-premises, offering controlled deployment options with highly rated support. Users seek more detailed guidance due to cost. BrowserStack offers deployment across public and private clouds, with accessible customer support and comprehensive documentation. While both products receive positive feedback for customer service, improvements in response time and support depth are noted.

Pricing and ROI: ReadyAPI Test is seen as expensive but justifies its cost through productivity and integration benefits. BrowserStack, though costly, is viewed as cost-effective for device and cross-browser testing. Both tools are recognized for delivering ROI, but there is room for refinement in pricing strategies and options.

To learn more, read our detailed BrowserStack vs. ReadyAPI Test Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. ReadyAPI Test

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 850,028 peers since 2012

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

BrowserStack

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)

ReadyAPI Test

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

21st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (9th), API Testing Tools (10th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.4%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 0.5%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

ANand Kale

Sr Practice Lead - Business and Experience Transformation at Peristent Systems

Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users

I integrated BrowserStack into our company's web and application test workflows because it has plugins that work with browsers and applications, allowing for cross-browser testing. BrowserStack was really helpful for cross-browser testing in areas involving mobiles, web applications, or tablets. The tool can help with the testing across all applications. I have not experienced any time-saving feature from the use of the tool. My company uses the product for real-device testing since it has a bunch of devices in our library. My company has a repository where we do manual testing. BrowserStack improved the quality of our company's applications. Improvements I have seen with the testing part revolve around the fact that it is able to do testing at a fast pace. The quality of the product is better since it can go through all the parts of the applications, meaning it can provide high test coverage. The tool is also good in the area of automation. The test coverage is higher, and the time taken during the testing phase is less due to automation. I have not used the product's integration capabilities since my company doesn't have the option to look at other QA testing tools like Selenium, which can be used for the automation capabilities provided. The product should offer more support for cross-browser testing, device testing, and testing across multiple devices. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

Read full review

Faiz Ahmed

Test Automation Specialist / Lead at Tata Consultancy Services

You can achieve any complex task with this tool

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. For example, it would be nice to have a Selenium plugin available from the menu, where I can select "open browser" and provide the URL. That URL would be immediately open in the browser. This is like a keyword, and then the Selenium plugin should be there.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The speed of the solution and its performance are valuable."

"I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience."

"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."

"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."

"The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market."

"Maintenance of the solution is easy."

"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."

"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."

More BrowserStack pros

"One good feature is SoapUI's URL check, which allows you to check among the applications. I'm not just talking about the ones for Android. It has all kinds of multi-world tests that are really helpful."

"API mockups, functional testing, and load testing are valuable features."

"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."

"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."

"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."

"The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on."

"The interface is user-friendly."

"SoapUI Pro is a good tool when it comes to API design and orchestration. Additionally, it is beneficial for functional and for performance testing."

Cons

"We are struggling to do local testing."

"While I was testing I was not 100% sure a that was properly mimicking the browsers or not. We had some issues with a browser, and the reason was the browser itself does not provide any support. If the local system does not provide any support, I think this was the problem. There should be better integration with other solutions, such as JIRA."

"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."

"BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally."

"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."

"We are having difficulty with the payment system for the BrowserStack team, as they only accept credit cards and we are encountering some issues."

"I would like to see clearer visibility."

"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."

More BrowserStack cons

"The UI could be a bit more flexible."

"SoapUI Pro is a little heavy due to the number of features. Previously it was not that heavy. Now the tool is too heavy, they should work on fixing this issue because until your system has lots of resources, you won't be able to use it seamlessly. The performance of the application itself could improve."

"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 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."

"It is limited to scope and risk services only. It does have some support for JMS, but it is not out-of-the-box; you have to do some tweaks here and there."

"Grouping of the cases is not possible in SoapUI, to my knowledge. When working with critical cases or the, we were not able to group them properly. We can definitely create a suite and add them there, but within a whole suite, we have to identify them, which was not easy."

"I find that I'm fighting with the opportunities to order requests."

"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."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is fine."

"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."

"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."

"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."

"The price of BrowserStack is high."

"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."

"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."

"This solution costs less than competing products."

"SoapUI Pro is open source but it has a subscription-based model which involves some more features. At the moment we are using the free version. The Pro version requires a license, and it is an annual license to use it."

"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."

"My understanding is that the pricing is okay, however, that's taken care of by our procurement team. It's around $5,000 for three years."

"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."

"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."

"The cost is not that bad."

"We have team members who are working in shifts, and it is not possible for us to utilize a single license on a single piece of hardware so that multiple team members can use it. We have to take out multiple licenses for each team member."

"It is free of charge."

More ReadyAPI Test pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

25%

Computer Software Company

14%

Insurance Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?

The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?

My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.

See all answers

What needs improvement with BrowserStack?

I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product. Accessibility testing is an area of concern where improvements are required.

See all answers

What do you like most about SoapUI Pro?

The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SoapUI Pro?

ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with SoapUI Pro?

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 b...

See all answers

Comparisons

LambdaTest vs BrowserStack

Compared 33% of the time

Sauce Labs vs BrowserStack

Compared 23% of the time

Perfecto vs BrowserStack

Compared 18% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs BrowserStack

Compared 5% of the time

CrossBrowserTesting vs BrowserStack

Compared 4% of the time

More BrowserStack Competitors

Postman vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 73% of the time

Broadcom Service Virtualization vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 10% of the time

ReadyAPI vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 5% of the time

Parasoft SOAtest vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 4% of the time

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 4% of the time

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack

April 2025

Download BrowserStack product report

Buyer's Guide

ReadyAPI Test

April 2025

Download ReadyAPI Test product report

Also Known As

No data available

SoapUI NG Pro

Overview

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.

BrowserStack

For REST, SOAP and other popular API and IoT protocols, SoapUI NG Pro provides the industry's most comprehensive and easy-to-learn functional testing capabilities. Based on open core technology proven by millions of community members, SoapUI NG Pro helps you ensure that your APIs perform as intended, meet your business requirements, timeframes, and team skill sets right from day one.

SmartBear

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG

Apple, Cisco, FedEx, eBay, Microsoft, MasterCard, Pfizer, Nike, Oracle, Volvo, Lufthansa, Disney, HP, Intel, U.S. Air Force, Schindler

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. ReadyAPI Test

April 2025

Free Report: BrowserStack vs. ReadyAPI Test

Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. ReadyAPI Test and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BrowserStack vs. ReadyAPI Test report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.