ReadyAPI Test vs TestingWhiz comparison

SmartBear and Cygnet.One are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. SmartBear is ranked #21 with an average rating of 7.3, while Cygnet.One is ranked #23 with an average rating of 7.0. SmartBear holds a 0.5% mindshare in FT, compared to Cygnet.One’s 0.1% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of SmartBear users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Cygnet.One users who would recommend it.

ReadyAPI Test

Read 31 ReadyAPI Test reviews

372 Views
302 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

TestingWhiz

Read 1 TestingWhiz review

135 Views
75 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

ReadyAPI Test

TestingWhiz

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between ReadyAPI Test and TestingWhiz based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Functional Testing Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 852,649 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

ReadyAPI Test

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

21st

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

9th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

API Testing Tools (10th)

TestingWhiz

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

23rd

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

12th

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 0.5%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TestingWhiz is 0.1%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Faiz Ahmed

Test Automation Specialist / Lead at Tata Consultancy Services

You can achieve any complex task with this tool

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. For example, it would be nice to have a Selenium plugin available from the menu, where I can select "open browser" and provide the URL. That URL would be immediately open in the browser. This is like a keyword, and then the Selenium plugin should be there.

Read full review

Vijay-Sawale

Test Associate & Manager at Opus Technologies

Low code features and good customization but needs more customer-requested features

We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation The organization was able to provide customers with business solutions by giving demos of various tools, assisting in securing…

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

"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 solution has some good scanning features."

"The tool’s scalability is very good."

"It's a very simple solution to use."

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

"API mockups, functional testing, and load testing are valuable features."

"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 solution scales well."

Cons

"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."

"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."

"I find that I'm fighting with the opportunities to order requests."

"The current interface is unsatisfactory."

"Occasionally, when you are saving, the solution can hang."

"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."

"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

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

"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."

"The cost is not that bad."

"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."

"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."

More ReadyAPI Test pricing and cost advice

Information not available

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

852,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

24%

Computer Software Company

13%

Insurance Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

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?

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 b...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TestingWhiz?

It is cheaper compared to other tools. The tool is web-based with various licenses, including professional and enterprise editions.

See all answers

What needs improvement with TestingWhiz?

Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available. Additionally, there is a need to improve the handling of less critical issues which...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for TestingWhiz?

We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation.

See all answers

Comparisons

Postman vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 73% of the time

Broadcom Service Virtualization vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 10% of the time

ReadyAPI vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 5% of the time

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 4% of the time

Parasoft SOAtest vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 4% of the time

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ReadyAPI Test

May 2025

Download ReadyAPI Test product report

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download TestingWhiz product report

Also Known As

SoapUI NG Pro

No data available

Overview

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

TestingWhiz is a Codeless Automation Testing Tool for Software, Web, Mobile, Database, Cloud, Web Services and API testing. It is pillared on a strong architecture combined with intuitive Automation Engine and short learning curve that promises to take your test automation to the next level.

Cygnet.One

Sample Customers

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

Verizon, IBM, Symantec, VMware, Hyundai, Choice Hotels, Intel, Autodesk, Frost

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

852,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.