ReadyAPI Reviews

ReadyAPI was installed on my system as a client and I used it for microservice API testing. The solution was used for an amusement park.

The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the drag-and-drop options and the integration with versioning tool solutions, such as Git.

ReadyAPI could improve by adding a conversion tool from one file type to another. Import support for multiple file types would be beneficial.

I have been using the solution for ReadyAPI for approximately one year.

The stability of ReadyAPI is good, but if we have to import large files there can be issues.

This solution is best suited for medium to large-sized companies. However, the use of the solution is not dependent on the company size, it's dependent on the volume of data or the APIs that are being used. A small company can work on a solution that involves a lot of APIs

I have not used the support from ReadyAPI.

I previously used SoapUI but it was decommissioned and was renamed ReadyAPI.

The initial setup of ReadyAPI was straightforward. The deployment took approximately 15 people.

We did the implementation of ReadyAPI in-house. We have approximately 10 to 12 people that are supporting the solution.

I compared ReadyAPI to Postman and ReadyAPI is an enterprise-friendly application. There is no other tool that matches the capabilities of ReadyAPI for enterprise-level companies.

I would recommend ReadyAPI to others because it's user-friendly and can handle enterprise-level API testing needs. You have all that you need in an API testing tool.

I rate ReadyAPI a nine out of ten.

We are using this solution for API testing on HL7 messages for healthcare.

It's easy to learn how to use it.

Version control does not work well. It's has a git API which is defective and doesn't work well with our version repository, Bitbucket. We do all version control using git bash (command line driven), and sometimes we have to try several times to as there still hooks into the ReadyAPI git API which cause issues.

I have been using ReadyAPI since April 2020.

I don't find it to be that stable. Sometimes it stalls, shuts down or you have to shut it down and restart it.

We haven't scaled it. We have approximately nine people using this solution in our organization.

SmartBear does not take phone calls. You have to email them if you want something resolved. It's a lot of back and forth through email, which takes a long time.

I am not impressed at all with SmartBear. We don't want to purchase any of their products going forward.

HP ALM - support is not good and the yearly license was very expensive - also not an easy tool to build API tests as we were using Service Test.

Licensing costs are yearly.

There are costs in addition to the licensing fee. For example, if you want to add the load testing you would pay more.

Not for API testing as we already had ReadyAPI - another team was using it for adhoc testing

It's not stable. The Git API within ReadyAPI is a a GUI front end to make it easier to do version control but it doesn't work well as mentioned.

It's not reliable. I would not recommend this product, as there are better products out there.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We have a lot of external vendors that we integrate with, so we need to validate all of the APIs. Also, we need to mark those services that don't need external vendor integration.

We are at the initial stage of using this product, and although we have a plan, it is too early to assess and recognize the benefits.

We like the user interface.

The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools.

They have interfaces with our performance tools, so we were able to leverage all of these integrations and plugins. It is very good from an integrative solution standpoint.

The reporting is not very robust and needs to be improved. They give the pass or fail criteria, but we need to know the history and also why it has failed. Essentially, the details that we see in other tools are missing. This is a request that we have made and we hope that these are implemented in the next version.

They should include support for integrating with Xray, which is another test management tool. More generally, they should have a larger scope when it comes to integrating with test management tools.

We recently acquired the license for ReadyAPI and have been using it for the past three months.

We have not found any bugs or glitches so stability-wise, it is good enough for us to use.

The scalability is good. We have eight people in the IT department who use this product. There are four in development and another four in the QA team.

The interaction that we have had with Smartbear has been pretty good. They are responsive, and they can give an action item as well as a timeline for when it can be implemented.

I would rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Prior to using Ready API, we were using Postman.

Postman is only for manual API testing, but when it comes to ReadyAPI, we can automate it using Groovy Scripts. We also have a plan to use Service Pro and LoadUI. These are the reasons that we selected ReadyAPI.

The initial setup was straightforward. All we had to do was configure the license server.

Our plan includes a need to filter out all the API, middle-tier bugs. This is the initial phase of development. We don't want to find any bugs in either UAT or UAP. That's an objective for us, but right now, we are setting up the team and people are working on it.

My advice for anybody who is implementing ReadyAPI is, to begin with establishing a framework of what they want to achieve. Comfort with the framework is more important, before acquiring the license.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I'm using ReadyAPI for services, automation, security testing, and manual updates.

The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the scripting tools and the connectivity to external data sources, such as Excel and PDF files. There are plenty of useful features that are useful, such as automating flexibility and usability. Overall, the solution is easy to use.

The reporting in ReadyAPI could be better. It can become sloppy, sometimes it works and other times it does not.

I have been using ReadyAPI for approximately seven years.

ReadyAPI is a stable solution.

When I was using an older version of the solution I had to use community support online. I have not contacted support from ReadyAPI directly.

The initial setup of ReadyAPI is easy. You only need to install it.

ReadyAPI is one of the best tools which is available in the market to automate and test manually.

Most of our employees know how to use the solution well and value it.

Utilizing ReadyAPI is highly recommended. It's a user-friendly and efficient tool that can meet your fundamental requirements, both in manual and automated methods. It's a reliable tool that's easy to use and there aren't many better alternatives available.

I rate ReadyAPI a seven out of ten.

We use ReadyAPI to build our own testing cases. We are able to use the same testing cases to complete automation tests, performance test team and security tests at the same time.

This solution is very intuitive. Once you finish your first few testing cases, you can change several parameters and create lots of testing cases. You could use the same testing cases for different purposes such as automation, performance and screen testing.

Many users will consider this solution expensive compared to the layout. It is more expensive than other solutions.

I have used this solution for a year and a half. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

This is a lot of documentation provided for support but they still need some important information to be added. For this reason, I check other communities discussions and forums.

I would rate the support team a six out of ten because they haven't always been able to solve my issue. 

Neutral

It is easy to install, but it takes time to set up your testing environment. You need to figure out how your API works and save the mutual authentications. You need to know the specification of your API partner and this takes time. It is not difficult to maintain.

I introduced the solution to my previous company. I just read the documentation and then got started.

It is more expensive than other API testing tools. For example, Postman is an open source tool and is free to use. ReadyAPI is a commercial tool and licenses. need to be purchased. It costs approximately $200 000 Taiwan Dollars for three years.

I would rate the pricing a six out of ten. 

I have used Postman before, but not for a long time. I definitely prefer ReadyAPI. It is very easy to use and it's very easy to learn. They also offer online virtual training and certifications. 

The documentation provided is good but it could be more comprehensive. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

We mainly used the different applications of API. It's data-driven, so I had to create the Excel sheet and then loop it through the test suites. We were running each version, which was helpful.

Our organization doesn't have many servers due to security compliance.

The most valuable feature is being able to run each version for test suites.

To generate a test suite in API, I had to create a separate one each time because otherwise it would just override the test. Each API had to be added separately. I thought I could just have one and then create different methods, but I had to add each API separately to create the test for that. That is an area that could be improved.

It would be nice to have some kind of automation or organization.

I used the latest version of this solution for about six months.

It was okay. There were one or two times the solution closed on me but otherwise it was fine.

The scalability is okay.

Support was good.

Setup was fine, but I needed to have some meetings with support to complete the integration with Azure DevOps.

The price was around $6,000 for one license, but I don't remember exactly. It is definitely expensive. Our organization was planning on having multiple licenses for this year.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10. I definitely like ReadyAPI. It is a good tool and it's easy to use.

We use ReadyAPI for API test automation. These APIs are developed by our development team and we need to validate the response. We use it for manual testing and then automation for those particular manual test cases. This has been my first experience completing API test automation or using tools for this purpose.

We get the data from an Excel sheet and then we input it into the API request to validate the response which we get. That is all done automatically using the automation suit I created on ReadyAPI. We save the data from the response into an Excel sheet. In my team, there are five people who are using it and we have five different licenses.

The most valuable feature has been the assertion as a test step as this has allowed us to increase the scope of testing and validation.

This solution is a pro version of SoapUI, which is a licensed version. There is a free version of SoapU but this requires coding and knowledge of groovy scripting. The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved. 

Stability of this solution could be improved. When we run test simultaneously, the systems gets stuck and we often need to restart it and try again. 

It is a scalable solution.

The initial setup is straightforward or works similarly to a Windows application. Once you open it up, you import the APIs which you want to automate or which you want to run. It is easier to setup compared to other API test automation tools. Deployment takes a few minutes. 

I would recommend this tool to others for basic test automation with good performance. A beginner level knowledge of groovy scripting will be sufficient to use this solution.

I would rate it a seven out of ten because I haven't used any other test automation tools so I don't have anything to compare it to.

The primary use of this solution is to perform code testing. We can set up the environment, the representations, and the code coverage.

We have this solution deployed on a Windows station, on-premises.

With this solution, we have achieved a fifty-percent gain when it comes to writing test cases.

The most valuable feature of this solution is SoapUI Pro. It is very friendly to use with the API.

ReadyAPI is not just a web service launcher, but a tool that can analyze results, for example from a dashboard, for tests that take a long time. You can see if there is a degradation in the service of the management system.

You will not find the coverage provided by ReadyAPI in other tools.

The dashboards are very good and consolidate all of the tests that you are performing with the client.

This solution is focused on web services, but it should be expanded to a complete test manager. For example, in the test suite, you can include a UI test, but this is with another tool. It is not fully integrated.

ReadyAPI is not fully integrated with all system ecosystem tests. If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful.

For what we have been doing, this solution has been ninety percent stable.

We are deploying it on a heavy client, and it depends on the infrastructure of our users. We did not deploy it on a virtual desktop. While it is very stable, it is not one hundred percent in our configuration.

We have between twenty-five and thirty people who use this solution.

Technical support for this solution is very good.

The only problem is that we are in France, and the support is in the US, so there is a difference in time that we have to accommodate for. That said, while they are on-site, they are very reactive.

Most of the time, we have to wait one day for support.

The deployment of this solution was very quick and simple.

This is a cheap solution when you consider the money that will be saved in testing.

Third-parties have been developing integration with this solution. For example, JIRA has been integrated.

My advice for anybody who is considering this solution is to consider that they will save a lot of money, and there will be a reduction in errors from the use of external data or wrong parameters. The quality of their code will be better, so do not hesitate to buy this kind of solution.

 I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.