OpenText Business Processing Testing vs ReadyAPI Test comparison

OpenText and SmartBear are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #36, while SmartBear is ranked #25. OpenText holds a 0.8% mindshare in FT, compared to SmartBear’s 2.1% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of SmartBear users who would recommend it.

OpenText Business Processin...

Read 7 OpenText Business Processing Testing reviews

493 Views
419 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

ReadyAPI Test

Read 31 ReadyAPI Test reviews

2,097 Views
944 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

OpenText Business Processin...

ReadyAPI Test

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

OpenText Business Processing Testing and ReadyAPI Test compete in business process and API testing. ReadyAPI Test has a superior position due to its extensive feature set, which justifies its pricing.

Features: OpenText Business Processing Testing enables comprehensive integrated process testing and compliance management with robust tools for end-to-end business scenarios, prioritizing a process-oriented approach. ReadyAPI Test offers extensive API testing functionality across multiple protocols, supported by advanced analytics, focusing on API-centric tasks.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Business Processing Testing could benefit from enhanced user interface optimization, better integration options with third-party applications, and more intuitive reporting features. ReadyAPI Test could improve by offering better customization options for reports, enhanced support for legacy systems, and refining their documentation for more straightforward step-by-step guidance.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: ReadyAPI Test facilitates a straightforward deployment process with comprehensive support options, aiding rapid integration into existing workflows. OpenText Business Processing Testing offers an equally efficient deployment experience but emphasizes tailored support services for complex enterprise environments, focusing on personalized assistance.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Business Processing Testing generally involves higher setup costs with a prolonged ROI timeline due to its broad offerings and enterprise focus. In contrast, ReadyAPI Test presents a more cost-effective initial setup with faster ROI, appealing to organizations prioritizing swift and efficient implementations.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. ReadyAPI Test Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. ReadyAPI Test

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 885,311 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

OpenText Business Processin...

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

36th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

ReadyAPI Test

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

25th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (13th), API Testing Tools (12th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Business Processing Testing is 0.8%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 2.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
ReadyAPI Test	2.1%
OpenText Business Processing Testing	0.8%
Other	97.1%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Revanth Reddy

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.

Read full review

Luis Sanchez

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.

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

"This solution is very helpful to me. 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 BPT framework is very modular."

"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."

"This solution is very helpful to me, and I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."

"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."

"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."

More OpenText Business Processing Testing pros

"The out-of-the-box support for the database is a valuable feature."

"The interface is user-friendly."

"The solution has some good scanning features."

"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, it's easy to use and easy to teach to others."

"I've majorly worked on SoapUI Pro, LoadUI and Service Pro and found all of them equally useful and very easy to understand tools."

"I primarily use Soap UI to test XML/JSON requests and responses for APIs hosted by us and our vendors."

"Overall, I think this solution is very cool and easy-to-use."

"For us this has meant increased test coverage, better system security, less test execution time and above all a greater quality product."

Cons

"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."

"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."

"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 solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."

"To be honest, technical support is not that great."

"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."

"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."

More OpenText Business Processing Testing cons

"When it comes to scalability, SoapUI has some room for improvement right now."

"Working with Git needs to be improved. SoapUI 1.8.0 has this annoying habit of touching or changing many files that are unrelated to a test developer's actual change."

"Automation features are not user-friendly."

"Sometimes you have to reload the project when you are moving/reorganizing tests in a project."

"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."

"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."

"The UI could be a bit more flexible."

"The UI should be improved."

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"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."

"It is free of charge."

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

"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."

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

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

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

885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

17%

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	1
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	19

Comparisons

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Business Processing Testing

Compared 17% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Business Processing Testing

Compared 15% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText Business Processing Testing

Compared 12% of the time

Telerik Test Studio vs OpenText Business Processing Testing

Compared 11% of the time

Parasoft SOAtest vs OpenText Business Processing Testing

Compared 10% of the time

More OpenText Business Processing Testing Competitors

Postman Enterprise vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 13% of the time

Broadcom Service Virtualization vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 7% of the time

Parasoft SOAtest vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 6% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 4% of the time

ReadyAPI vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 4% of the time

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Business Processing Testing

March 2026

OpenText Business Processing Testing report

Download OpenText Business Processing Testing product report

Buyer's Guide

ReadyAPI Test

March 2026

Download ReadyAPI Test product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus Business Process Testing, Business Process Testing, HPE Business Process Testing

SoapUI NG Pro

Overview

OpenText Business Processing Testing (BPT) test framework software will help you move from one-off manual testing and ad hoc functional automated testing to an architected approach with a library of reusable test components. BPT accelerates the move to component-based testing with an integrated test framework approach to creating a repository of reusable test modules that allow for changes to be made once, then propagated across your distributed agile teams to all affected tests.

OpenText

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

Migros Bank AG

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

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. ReadyAPI Test

March 2026

Free Report: OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. ReadyAPI Test

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. ReadyAPI Test and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Business Processing Testing 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.