We performed a comparison between ReadyAPI Test and Selenium HQ 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."The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."
"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."
"The tool’s scalability is very good."
"The out-of-the-box support for the database is a valuable feature."
"The solution has some good scanning features."
"We used to write our own solutions, from small scripts to task web services, so this saves us thousands of hours."
"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."
"Selenium web driver - Java."
"Language support - since it supports Java and other programming languages it is easy to integrate with other systems."
"The solution is very easy to implement."
"The testing solution produces the best web applications."
"The primary benefit is its cost and the ability to use the cloud."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium is how easy it is to automate."
"Since Selenium HQ has multiple plug-ins, we can use it with multiple tools and multiple languages."
"The most valuable features are ExpectedConditions, actions, assertions, verifications, flexible rates, and third-party integrations."
"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."
"The UI should be improved."
"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."
"Occasionally, when you are saving, the solution can hang."
"If the load and bare minimum could be defined, I would give this solution a higher rating."
"The current interface is unsatisfactory."
"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."
"We tried automation but it's not easy to integrate with the synching and some of the mission tools that we use for automated testing of APIs."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
"The drawback is the solution is not easy to learn."
"Selenium has room for improvement as it does not support the tests and result-sharing in anything but a manual way."
"The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing."
"It would be awesome if there was a standalone implementation of Selenium for non-developer users."
"In the beginning, we had issues with several test cases failing during regression. Over a period of time, we built our own framework around Selenium which helped us overcome of these issues."
"For people that don't know about technology, maybe it's difficult to use."
"They should add more functionality to the solution."
ReadyAPI Test is ranked 15th in Functional Testing Tools with 31 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. ReadyAPI Test is rated 8.0, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of ReadyAPI Test writes "Has out-of-the-box database support and can be easily used by non-technical staff ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". ReadyAPI Test is most compared with Postman, ReadyAPI, Broadcom Service Virtualization, Tricentis Tosca and OpenText UFT One, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test. See our ReadyAPI Test vs. Selenium HQ 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.
