OpenText Business Processing Testing vs ReadyAPI Test comparison

OpenText and SmartBear are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #40, while SmartBear is ranked #21 with an average rating of 7.3. OpenText holds a 0.1% mindshare in FT, compared to SmartBear’s 0.5% 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

132 Views
37 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

ReadyAPI Test

Read 31 ReadyAPI Test reviews

336 Views
135 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: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Business Processing Testing vs. ReadyAPI Test

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 859,129 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

40th

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

21st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (9th), API Testing Tools (9th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Business Processing Testing is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 0.5%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

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."

"We used to write our own solutions, from small scripts to task web services, so this saves us thousands of hours."

"The solution offers excellent integration capabilities."

"The utmost importance lies in the performance of the application."

"The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."

"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."

"ReadyAPI has the power to enrich all the technical work. You can achieve any complex task using ReadyAPI. I can also do UI automation with ReadyAPI. In a few test cases, we want to check the API and the equivalent UI. I download a job and write a piece of Groovy or Java code. It's almost the same in ReadyAPI. I can do that in a single test case. ReadyAPI is a powerful tool because you can do anything you want, but only you need to download the right set of jobs and produce the right set of code."

"Using SoapUI's automation suites to run all our test cases saved us a lot of time. Running 300 test cases takes about three to four days. When you automate all that, it takes only two to three hours."

"The tool’s scalability is very good."

Cons

"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. 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."

"SoapUI Pro is a little heavy due to the number of features. Previously it was not that heavy. Now the tool is too heavy, they should work on fixing this issue because until your system has lots of resources, you won't be able to use it seamlessly. The performance of the application itself could improve."

"It is limited to scope and risk services only. It does have some support for JMS, but it is not out-of-the-box; you have to do some tweaks here and there."

"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."

"Grouping of the cases is not possible in SoapUI, to my knowledge. When working with critical cases or the, we were not able to group them properly. We can definitely create a suite and add them there, but within a whole suite, we have to identify them, which was not easy."

"Automation features are not user-friendly."

"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."

"I would like more documentation, training, tutorials, etc. Also, I don't particularly appreciate that I have to save everything. It takes up a lot of space on my laptop, but I have to install the WSDL again If I don't save it."

"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."

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

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

"The cost is not that bad."

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

"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."

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

"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."

"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."

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

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

23%

Insurance Company

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about SoapUI Pro?

The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SoapUI Pro?

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

See all answers

What needs improvement with SoapUI Pro?

See all answers

Comparisons

No data available

Postman vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 71% of the time

Broadcom Service Virtualization vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 10% of the time

ReadyAPI vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 6% of the time

Katalon Studio vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 5% of the time

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 4% of the time

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Business Processing Testing

June 2025

OpenText Business Processing Testing report

Download OpenText Business Processing Testing product report

Buyer's Guide

ReadyAPI Test

June 2025

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

May 2025

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: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

859,129 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.