No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

IBM DevOps Test UI vs ReadyAPI Test comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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

IBM DevOps Test UI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
26th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
13th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ReadyAPI Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
22nd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 1.7%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 2.3%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ReadyAPI Test2.3%
IBM DevOps Test UI1.7%
Other96.0%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada
Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support
The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework. The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run. The reason is that changes were made to how it works with the browser and the startup takes some time. Adjusting those changes to speed up the load time will improve the solution.
Luis Sanchez - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Quality Assurance Test Engineer at Dormakaba
Helps in data, regression, performance, security, and functional testing
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is 100% compatible with all sorts of database integrations and is compatible with all types of open source TFT-based applications, which makes it a great product to have."
"It helps in automation by using better object recognition as compared to other tools in the market."
"As it is built on Ellipse/Java and costs less than other tools, it is recommended."
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"By automating regression test suites using this product, we were able to show time savings of more than 1200 hours in less than ONE year."
"For the money this is a great tool."
"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."
"We can test as many APIs as we like, it's very reliable and very easy to understand, anyone can learn it very quickly."
"We chose this tool because it's lightweight, simple and intuitive."
"We run around 10,000 different validations, including database validations, and we can complete the entire aggregation in less than one hour."
"The out-of-the-box support for the database is a valuable feature."
"The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"Great tool. Makes API testing super easy to set up and use."
 

Cons

"The object repository used for identifying objects can be made better. It has been noticed that the RFT tool is unable to identify some objects, due to which we are unable to add them to the object repository."
"If you look at today's current context, I wouldn't recommend RFT because there are far more advanced solutions and products available."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"It does not fully justify being a paid tool, and it needs improvement."
"With version 8.5 we faced workspace crash issues frequently."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"If in the future there is no support for mobile applications, then we will be using it less."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"The product is a good solution for functional back end testing, but the price should be lower due to already mentioned problems, bugs."
"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."
"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."
"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."
"I have not been able to use this tool a lot of time, so I don't consider myself in a position to say what can really be improved."
"Sometimes you have to reload the project when you are moving/reorganizing tests in a project."
"I think their user-information sites should be better defined by SoapUI. For example, if I want to hit that virtualize server, let's say, with a 100K load — what is the bare minimum requirement?"
"Because we are paying such a huge cost, we expect more hands-on support from their research and development team."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."
"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."
"The cost is not that bad."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It is free of charge."
"ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten."
"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise20
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Functional Tester
SoapUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edumate
Apple, Cisco, FedEx, eBay, Microsoft, MasterCard, Pfizer, Nike, Oracle, Volvo, Lufthansa, Disney, HP, Intel, U.S. Air Force, Schindler
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DevOps Test UI vs. ReadyAPI Test and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.