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

OpenText Business Processing Testing vs ReadyAPI comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

OpenText Business Processin...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
37th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ReadyAPI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
15th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Business Processing Testing is 1.0%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 1.8%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ReadyAPI1.8%
OpenText Business Processing Testing1.0%
Other97.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

RR
Consultant at Infrasoft Technologies
Helpful solution that enables us to execute our use cases
There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be a lot easier to understand if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool.
PK
Lead QA Engineer at Msys Technologies
Experience effective testing with flexible licensing alongside pivotal insights on essential improvements
For non-functional testing, I focus on performance and security. For performance and security tests, I used REST API, SoapUI, and JMeter. These tools help us conduct thorough testing across these dimensions. I find ReadyAPI helpful especially in overcoming security issues, as we experienced slowness in the application after merging our JAR files. For instance, if a person wants to access a university database and encounters a timeout error, we learned through ReadyAPI that the issue was due to HTML protocol limits with the payload. We fine-tuned this process to display the expected data effectively. I consider ReadyAPI a cost-effective solution because it covers three verticals without needing to purchase separate tools for security, performance, or functional testing. ReadyAPI is a versatile tool for creating multiple testing frameworks and validating various parameters seamlessly. REST API is the tool I use to test all three types of articles, meaning I validate the APIs I send to my peers or clients for functional testing, and I also perform security testing to ensure the URL and data passed through multiple components adhere to policies and user privileges. This is done through functional security testing using the REST API tool, and for performance, I ensure that applications can be accessed simultaneously by multiple users without hindrance or slowness through thorough performance testing.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We can now take test automation through the entire business process -- testing web service availability before automated test packs start, sending and retrieving data via web-services and control of all web service testing in a single tool, along with the GUI testing of business processes across a multitude of platforms from java web through to AS400 green screen terminal apps."
"The big difference with BPT over conventional frameworks with which I have worked is that BPT allows me to separate test development from automation development."
"This solution is very helpful to me, and I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."
"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that even a nontechnical tester, like a functional tester or a business analyst, can use it once the components are ready."
"ROI is pretty good as the approach of framework allows virtually everyone to take part in designing test cases."
"Because everyone can create test cases, not only the quantity but also the quality is improved, which results in less defects in production."
"The BPT framework is very modular."
"I recommend this solution to new users because it is the best solution you can get across the globe for API, test automation, and API penetration testing."
"The training for this solution is very good."
"The most valuable feature has been the assertion as a test step as this has allowed us to increase the scope of testing and validation."
"My advice is that based on the flexibility of the application, the ease of use, and the price, it's definitely worth it."
"The most valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it is user-friendly."
"It's great for those that don't have as much exposure to programming."
"The feature that allows you to import an API collection or a project is valuable."
"I definitely like ReadyAPI; it is a good tool and it's easy to use."
 

Cons

"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool."
"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."
"The only one I can really think of is speed to test execution."
"Test execution speed has been my biggest concern."
"Initial releases we used of the product (v12) were a little unstable, but with the release of v12.01, we had no further issues."
"To be honest, technical support is not that great."
"Technical support lacks efficiency and all they do is to move in circles by opening new tickets and all the related stuffs without any intention of solving the real problem."
"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."
"It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today. Other solutions have an in-built mechanism where I can directly and easily connect. An API is more around a user submitting a request on the frontend. It then hits the backend, puts the data, and responds back. If I am hitting MongoDB or NoSQL databases, I do not have ready-made inbuilt solutions in ReadyAPI that can easily help me in automating it faster. In our organization, we deal with NoSQL databases, and therefore, we need Groovy. We just cannot have a connector from ReadyAPI to do that. I have to write Groovy scripts. If you have themes that are predominantly using MongoDB, it leads to more maintenance and support activity because we are introducing more code into our commission. In terms of additional features, it can have cloud support. This is one of the things where we are getting into cloud support. We'll see how it works, but it is one of the doubts that we still have."
"If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful."
"We have an older version of ReadyAPI and it's not supporting our whole tests, so we have had to migrate some or we've had difficulties running them because they're very old script."
"The reporting is not very robust and needs to be improved."
"I would say if anything needs to be improved, maybe it's some aspects of the user interface."
"I think the security testing with API could be improved as they provide limited templates."
"I would like to see a better dashboard for monitoring in the next release of this solution."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It costs approximately $200 000 Taiwan Dollars for three years."
"For each license, they charge the same amount, which is less than $1,000 for each desktop license."
"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."
"This is a cheap solution when you consider the money that will be saved in testing."
"The solution is dynamically priced so you only pay for what you use."
"The cost of a license is probably around $1,000 to $2,000. Accounting is done by my leadership. I am more into implementations and making sure all things and processes are taken care of and the frameworks are maintained and managed."
"The price of the solution has been fine."
"The thing with ReadyAPI is that you have to buy different licenses for different purposes."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Construction Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise28
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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?
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 updati...
What is your primary use case for ReadyAPI?
My experience with Katalon Studio is that we used Katalon for one of our projects, and then I started leveraging Katalon by integrating it with AI tools, AP tools, and aptly tools. Aptly tool is an...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Business Process Testing, Business Process Testing, HPE Business Process Testing
Ready API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Migros Bank AG
Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.