ReadyAPI Reviews

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 testing APIs.

When we are doing API testing we have found it to be very efficient to receive results. Additionally, you are able to do tests directly from the API.

I have used ReadyAPI within the past 12 months.

The solution is stable.

I have found ReadyAPI scalable.

I have used the support and they assisted us with a problem which they resolved. 

I have used TestComplete.

The initial setup could be less complex.

The price of the solution has been fine.

My advice to anyone who wants to do API testing, this solution is easy to use.

I rate ReadyAPI an eight 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.

ReadyAPI is predominantly used for functional testing of the APIs. Our company has a lot of micro strategy concepts, and we are building a lot of APIs. The focus is on more validations around the APIs for faster or quicker testing rather than the frontend. 

When you are working in sprints, you need to have continuous feedback. ReadyAPI definitely helps in automating very fast and rapidly. We have less coding, and we can more easily define our assertions. 

We don't use it for full-blown performance testing, but normally if you are doing your functional testing, it gives you the request and response time. Anybody who is doing functional testing can see what the request and response times are and raise a flag based upon their business affiliates, that is, whether it is meeting their affiliates. You can identify this during functional testing.

It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today. Other solutions have an in-built mechanism where I can directly and easily connect. An API is more around a user submitting a request on the frontend. It then hits the backend, puts the data, and responds back. If I am hitting MongoDB or NoSQL databases, I do not have ready-made inbuilt solutions in ReadyAPI that can easily help me in automating it faster. In our organization, we deal with NoSQL databases, and therefore, we need Groovy. We just cannot have a connector from ReadyAPI to do that. I have to write Groovy scripts. If you have themes that are predominantly using MongoDB, it leads to more maintenance and support activity because we are introducing more code into our commission.

In terms of additional features, it can have cloud support. This is one of the things where we are getting into cloud support. We'll see how it works, but it is one of the doubts that we still have.

I have been using this solution for almost four years now.

It's pretty good. I haven't seen any issue or ReadyAPI crash in the last four years.

It is scalable. For example, if I'm running a UI test case, it can take me a minimum of 1 or 2 minutes or 45 seconds to 2 to 3 hours, depending upon the complexity of the workflow. If I want to test the same in API and I have defined my framework and everything, I could do it in 30 seconds or 40 seconds.

Technical support is pretty helpful. They are pretty responsive. They come back to you to find out if you want some training on ReadyAPI. If you want to schedule, they will schedule one. They will also help your team to grow or scale up.

When I came in, we were only using SmartBear. Before that, maybe there were normal functional automation testing tools, where you can define your API frameworks and do API testing. With such tools, you write more code for defining the API framework, which already comes inbuilt with ReadyAPI.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. Its deployment is pretty simple as well. It doesn't take too long to deploy it.

The cost of a license is probably around $1,000 to $2,000. Accounting is done by my leadership. I am more into implementations and making sure all things and processes are taken care of and the frameworks are maintained and managed. 

I would say go for it. It is a really great tool. It is a game-changer because you can automate faster and quicker. It also doesn't take much time for any person to pick up the tool. It is pretty lightweight. Any person who has a little bit of technical background or 1% JavaScript knowledge can quickly use it and write code in Groovy.

I would rate ReadyAPI an eight out of ten.

We were using ReadyAPI for performance testing and creating mocks but there were some issues in terms of scaling, so we are no longer using this solution.

The most valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it is user-friendly.

We stopped using this solution because of issues with scalability. Performance and memory management both need to be improved because other solutions use less memory for the same amount of data.

I think that there was an open-source version, with a lower cost, then this would be a recipe to get into bigger markets.

I used ReadyAPI for about one year.

I think that this is a stable product.

ReadyAPI is not as scalable as other solutions, such as Karate. More resources, especially in terms of memory, are required for the same amount of data.

The scale does not only refer to the number of users. It concerns the applications and how often they make calls to different servers or mocks. 

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

The implementation was done by my team.

It took about a week to deploy because it involved more than just an installation. There was connectivity to configure and it had to be integrated with existing testing frameworks.

We migrated back to Karate about six months ago. It is more scalable and has more plugin features. There is also the point of cost because ReadyAPI requires licensing and Karate is open-source.

I would recommend this solution to people who need official support. For companies who have experts in open-source technology, they can avoid using ReadyAPI. I think that it would come down to the specific client, or project.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use ReadyAPI for API and data-driven testing. You can run your APIs through a loop.

ReadyAPI is a QA testing tool. We were able to catch many bugs because we could inject various scenarios running through our data-driven testing. This improves the quality of our products.

ReadyAPI could improve by having dynamic validation information.

I have been using ReadyAPI for approximately eight years.

ReadyAPI is stable.

The scalability of ReadyAPI is good. However, every one of the 20 QA team members uses it independently.

The support from ReadyAPI is very good.

I rate the support from ReadyAPI a four out of five.

Positive

The initial setup of ReadyAPI is straightforward.

The IT team members can install the solution themself.

We have received a return on investment using ReadyAPI.

Our IT team does the maintenance of the solution.

I would recommend others try out the solution to see if it fits their needs.

I rate ReadyAPI a nine out of ten.

ReadyAPI's best features are that it's user-friendly and its behavior-driven development is flexible.

Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions. ReadyAPI should also include the ability to add and modify existing files.

I've been using ReadyAPI for almost fifteen years.

ReadyAPI is stable.

The initial setup is straightforward for anybody with experience.

ReadyAPI is moderately priced, with added costs for more plugins.

I would rate ReadyAPI eight out of ten.

I primarily use ReadyAPI to convert APIs into functional test cases and to manage customer information.

ReadyAPI's best features are user-friendliness, smooth integration with Postman, the speed of creating test cases, and integration with customer data.

An improvement for ReadyAPI would be automated import/export with third-party tools. It can also be hard for new testers to learn.

I've been using ReadyAPI for six months.

ReadyAPI is stable.

ReadyAPI's customer support isn't that great, particularly their response time.

The initial setup is very easy.

ReadyAPI requires a product license and a subscription, which is renewable every year or three years. Its pricing is very reasonable, unlike more expensive competitors like Tosca, XPlant, or Catalon.

I would advise anybody thinking of implementing ReadyAPI to install the trial version and go through the tutorial so that they can learn how the solution works. I would rate ReadyAPI as eight out of ten.