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

LambdaTest vs ReadyAPI comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

LambdaTest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (9th)
ReadyAPI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 5.7%, up from 5.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 1.3%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Dinesh Saharan - PeerSpot reviewer
The tool reduces the manual effort needed and helps automate certain tasks for users
I won't be able to comment on what could be improved in the solution since I am not the one who handles LambdaTest. It is our company's IT team that takes care of LambdaTest. Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis. If something is perfect, it doesn't mean that it doesn't need to improvise or improve, like in terms of adding new features. There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time.
Walter Wirch - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamless integration with cloud environments supports backend projects while seeking AWS Lambda enhancements
ReadyAPI enhances my workflows by allowing us to use Docker containers based on the ReadyAPI test runner. It helps extend our functional tests, even though we are not heavily using performance testing. It supports a wide range of protocols such as Kafka and GRPC, depending on the project. 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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Automation and mobile testing have improved our efficiency."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Builds that took days to complete with in-house infrastructure were executed in a couple of hours."
"We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring."
"The slow nature of a cloud platform was compensated with parallel testing, and now we are able to finish our testing job faster than it was before COVID."
"LambdaTest offers geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"The most valuable features are that it's essentially on-demand, and you only focus on getting the code that needs to be executed without having to worry about the OS, hardware, etc."
"HyperExecute adds significant speed to execution, enhancing the overall testing process."
"One of the features of ReadyAPI that's worth mentioning is that it allows you to parameterize. I'm working with more than two hundred resources, so I don't have to go and make a small change at each point every time. I have the option to just parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere. Another valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it provides a customized environment. In my company, you work in different environments, such as QA, UAT, and LT, so the URLs for every environment are different. In ReadyAPI, you can customize your environment, set it up, then start working on it. Another feature worth mentioning that's offered in ReadyAPI is automating your test value as the tool allows Groovy scripting. In your test case, you can use a Groovy script that says that in a particular test case, you have ten resources, but you just want to exhibit five and that you don't want to exhibit the remaining five. You can write a small Groovy script that lets you execute just five resources out of the ten resources. I also like that ReadyAPI allows you to read the data from CFC and Excel. It also allows you to create or customize your data, but that only works at a certain point because every application has its specific data. ReadyAPI cannot generate every data, but when I'm posting and I want to generate a random name, such as a first name, I can do it in ReadyAPI. The tool also has many different features which I find valuable, including Git integration."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities."
"The great thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a wide variety of functions. You can test any API that you come across. You are not limited to one type of API. It supports many APIs."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the scripting tools and the connectivity to external data sources, such as Excel and PDF files. There are plenty of useful features that are useful, such as automating flexibility and usability. Overall, the solution is easy to use."
"ReadyAPI enhances my workflows by allowing us to use Docker containers based on the ReadyAPI test runner."
"The dashboards are very good and consolidate all of the tests that you are performing with the client."
"Reporting is more robust than other products because test reports can be exported in multiple ways."
"The feature that allows you to import an API collection or a project is valuable."
 

Cons

"You cannot perform native-app testing, as they offer simulation for web testing only."
"The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting."
"I would like to see all of the features available in the freemium plan so that I can test them."
"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."
"I feel that the automated screenshot testing takes a little longer on MacOS sometimes."
"The scalability is good with Amazon, but IBM had some issues."
"Responsive testing UI is a bit cluttered, whereas the LT browser is much better to use."
"LambdaTest needs to improve its speed and memory because it takes a long time to load."
"There is room for improvement in ReadyAPI, particularly in the user interface."
"Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions."
"There are lots of options within the solution, however they are not upfront or user-friendly."
"The UI should be flexible. Currently, the UI isn't."
"Lacking flexibility of adding more custom verification for security testing."
"The solution is made up of multiple tools, and the one additional feature we'd like to have is load testing."
"They have performance testing also. However, it's not that great."
"One issue I found with ReadyAPI is related to event listeners compared to JMeter or SoapUI. We created an in-house dashboard to display automation runs across projects, which required manual updating of event listeners for new project imports."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an affordable product."
"LambdaTest is priced well, which is why we migrated to it."
"LambdaTest's pricing is cheaper than that of other similar platforms."
"LambdaTest is paid per execution."
"LambdaTest is on the cloud, offers both free and paid plans which start at $19 USD per month."
"From the customer side, LambdaTest is cheaper for big company usage and works fine as other similar applications."
"The pricing could be made cheaper."
"I used the product for free."
"ReadyAPI is moderately priced, with added costs for more plugins."
"If I remember correctly, ReadyAPI costs between $5,000 to $7,000 for five thousand virtual users running it at a given point in time. Other tools, for example, Apache JMeter, can run millions of users at a given time. ReadyAPI is a tool that requires you to pay more money if you want more users to run it for performance testing. For functional testing, each ReadyAPI license costs $1,000, and you do get basic testing, and it's inclusive of one hundred users. In my company, if there's a need for more than one hundred users, my team uses Apache JMeter because it's futile to end up paying $5,000 or $6,000 annually just for performance testing, which can be done in Apache JMeter as well. Given the circumstances, my team does performance testing only towards the end of the fiscal year when the regulatory testing of applications takes place. If I have to run ReadyAPI just for two days or just for ten or fifteen odd days, then it's not worth paying $5,000 for the license with the small number of users provided by ReadyAPI."
"The price was around $6,000 for one license, but I don't remember exactly. It is definitely expensive. Our organization was planning on having multiple licenses for this year."
"The thing with ReadyAPI is that you have to buy different licenses for different purposes."
"For each license, they charge the same amount, which is less than $1,000 for each desktop license."
"The solution is dynamically priced so you only pay for what you use."
"We have approximately 12 licenses in place. There are other solutions that are more expensive than ReadyAPI that have more features, but if the scope of the project is limited to SOAP and REST service, then this is the best option."
"We use fixed licenses, and the last time I checked, I want to say it's around $680 per seat per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
15%
Insurance Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about LambdaTest?
We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LambdaTest?
The pricing of LambdaTest depends on the deal negotiated. It is cost-effective compared to competitors like BrowserStack ( /products/browserstack-reviews ) and Sauce Labs ( /products/sauce-labs-rev...
What needs improvement with LambdaTest?
The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting. There are specific use cases related to authentication and authoriz...
What do you like most about ReadyAPI?
The performance testing capabilities are very good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI?
Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs. License prices can be a factor in considering which technologies to adopt.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI?
In native teams and cloud environments, there is room for improvement. I'm considering the use of AWS and its Lambda functionalities prepared by the vendor. These are more so points from my wishlis...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Ready API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bringmax, Totpal, Nethhouse, Integreplanner, Cognizant, Vendisol, Clearscale, Edureka
Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
Find out what your peers are saying about LambdaTest vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.