We performed a comparison between Parasoft SOAtest and ReadyAPI Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"Technical support is helpful."
"The solution is scalable."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"The solution has some good scanning features."
"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 Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"The tool’s scalability is very good."
"One good feature is SoapUI's URL check, which allows you to check among the applications. I'm not just talking about the ones for Android. It has all kinds of multi-world tests that are really helpful."
"We used to write our own solutions, from small scripts to task web services, so this saves us thousands of hours."
"SoapUI Pro is a good tool when it comes to API design and orchestration. Additionally, it is beneficial for functional and for performance testing."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."
"Automation features are not user-friendly."
"The UI could be a bit more flexible."
"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."
"SoapUI would benefit from some more customization abilities. It's a good interface, but it would be nice if they added the ability to build custom dashboards where the user can do their own bar graphs and pie charts."
"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."
"I find that I'm fighting with the opportunities to order requests."
"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."
Parasoft SOAtest is widely recognized as the leading enterprise-grade solution for API functional and nonfunctional testing and API integrity. Thoroughly test composite applications with robust support for REST and web services, plus over 120 supported protocols and message types.
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 26th in Functional Testing Tools with 3 reviews while ReadyAPI Test is ranked 9th in Functional Testing Tools with 9 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 6.6, while ReadyAPI Test is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Easy to use and understand with multiple types of testing on offer". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI Test writes "Easy to learn and strong automation features but a little pricey for individual users". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Tricentis Tosca and Klocwork, whereas ReadyAPI Test is most compared with Postman, ReadyAPI, Broadcom Service Virtualization, Apache JMeter and Tricentis Tosca. See our Parasoft SOAtest vs. ReadyAPI Test report.
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.