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

"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester, which analyzes the changes in UI elements and allows me to automatically adapt and change my automation testing."
"Robust API provides quick turnaround for developers to understand and automate functional test case quickly."
"The technical support is good; at least their response time is good, and whenever we ask them for help regarding deployment customizations, custom code implementation, or other code needs, they heavily support us, assign us IT engineers who work alongside us helping with code-related issues, and stay until the problem is resolved."
"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"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."
"As it is built on Ellipse/Java and costs less than other tools, it is recommended."
"It helps in automation by using better object recognition as compared to other tools in the market."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"It adds to the productivity of developers and QAs, so there is definitely a return."
"The utmost importance lies in the performance of the application."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"This product is quite useful for us."
"The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"One of the main things that's great is the excellent integration into the DevOps tool-chain and the reuse of code between SoapUI and LoadUI."
"The solution offers excellent integration capabilities."
"The ability to analyse and simulate web services are clearly the main value."
 

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."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"If you look at today's current context, I wouldn't recommend RFT because there are far more advanced solutions and products available."
"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."
"It does not fully justify being a paid tool, and it needs improvement."
"If in the future there is no support for mobile applications, then we will be using it less."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."
"The current interface is unsatisfactory."
"The application has to be restarted after being used for an hour or so as it stops working after that."
"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?"
"I am never going to buy SoapUI, far too expensive."
"Sometimes it would get stuck, so we had to close ReadyAPI and then start it again."
"When it comes to scalability, SoapUI has some room for improvement right now."
"The tools that are stated by SmartBear speaks for itself, but when it comes to improvements, there could be a release which only aims for the development of beginners in terms of understanding the tools that are laid by SmartBear."
 

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."
"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."
"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."
"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."
"It is free of charge."
"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,422 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.
913,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.