ReadyAPI Test Reviews

The solution saves us a ginormous amount of time. We used to write our own solutions, from small scripts to task web services, so this saves us thousands of hours.

ReadyAPI Test is awesome and a huge time-saver. The groovy scripting is the most valuable feature and it gives us the ability to expand the abilities of the tool. 

The UI could be a bit more flexible. 

I have been using this solution for six years or so. 

The solution is very stable. 

This is a scalable solution. There are about six people using it in our company, and we have plans to increase usage in the future. 

I would rate the technical support as a five out of five. 

Previously, we used our homegrown web client. 

If you don't know the structure of web services, it could be complex to set up. 

We definitely see an ROI from this solution. 

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

This solution is definitely worth the cost. I would rate it as a ten out of ten. 

SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly. 

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. 

I've used SoapUI off and on for about three months.

The scalability is okay.

Setting up SoapUI is straightforward. I just downloaded it and started using it. That's the good thing about it. I don't have to go through all those things.

SoapUI is open-source.

I rate SoapUI seven out of 10.

We are using SoapUI Pro as an API testing tool. We do API building, testing, and tracking.

SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards.

I have been using SoapUI Pro for approximately two years.

The stability of SoapUI Pro is good.

We have not had a problem with the scalability of SoapUI Pro.

We have approximately six people using this solution. We will increase usage in the future.

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

The initial setup is straightforward and it takes less than 30 minutes.

We did the implementation in-house of SoapUI Pro. We have one person that is assigned to SoapUI Pro for maintenance and support.

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.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate SoapUI Pro an eight out of ten.

We were using SoapUI to do UI automation.

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.

We used SoapUI for Web API Automation as well as UI automation. With SoapUI's automation suites, we were able to make it very easy and readable by any other user. The test cases were written in a given format where we were able to fulfill the prerequisites by the given statement. We were able to very easily load the data into the database as a prerequisite for the UI and input the given steps using the GUI. 

And when we got to the part where we were performing the action in the UI, the integration between Selenium and SoapUI was very easy. In that step, it made it very easy to validate the UI. 

SoapUI is easy to learn. When we get a new tester on the teams, they can pick it up quickly.

SoapUI has a lot of features I like, such as the different data generators and data sources. The looping part of it is also good.

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.

When we ran a batch of test cases, we were not able to initiate the next batch automatically. When one suite was completed, we had to trigger another the next test suite manually. That means something from one test suite to another. Suppose, there are 10 test cases in the first suite and another 10 in the second. We have to initiate the first 10 cases and then the second. When we were triggering from the project level, it failed to move from the first suite to the second, and I'm not sure why. But that was something maybe related to the code, not the tool.

I used SoapUI on one project in March 2021.

I was using ReadyAPI and SoapUI Pro. Sometimes it would get stuck, so we had to close ReadyAPI and then start it again. This would happen occasionally. 

And we were also integrating Humps JMS with the SoapUI for messaging purposes.  Sometimes it got stuck. We would have to end the task and then do it again.

It was on-premises. So whenever any tester needed it, they can set it up themself. 
It was not on the cloud, so I have not worked on the cloud. 

To activate the license, we had to use technical support from the SoapUI and that was very quick. They respond to emails very promptly. When you email them, they say they will respond in 24 hours, but it doesn't even take them that long.

The setup was a little bit complicated because we need to download the external JAR to support the Oracle database connection. We had to download the extra JAR for the SoapUI. We also had to do the Selenium setup. We need to create folders where we could place these — that Selenium standalone and the JAR. That was a little bit complex but not too bad. This was our first time, but if we had known what to do, then it would have been easy.

It was not straightforward because we had to integrate with Selenium and the external JAR was needed to set it up and automate the UI. But I was still able to do it by myself in two to three hours.

There was a big investment but the company definitely saw a return. The whole integration pack across the whole organization was using SoapUI. All the framework was designed only using SoapUI Pro. Each one of the testers had two licenses: one for the Windows machine and one for UNIX. But the organization definitely benefited because the releases were frequent and the automation was being done. 

I find SoapUI a little bit expensive because if I need to buy a personal license for one year, then it will cost around 700 to 800 pounds. I'm not sure what an enterprise license costs, but from an individual perspective, I found it costly.

So in my project, two tools were used: Postman and SoapUI Pro. In my organization, most use SoapUI Pro because it's easy to use. There are many more automation features actually in the Pro version of the SoapUI. I am not sure about Postman because we were using it a very basic level. I'm not sure whether automation is possible or not in Postman, but in SoapUI Pro it definitely is. 

I would rate SoapUI a seven out of 10. I would love to work on the SoapUI Pro again because it is really a great product. I would say definitely recommend SoapUI. It's a very useful tool and it will enhance your coding skills as well. It will help you learn to write code well. 
The framework is very easy. It's also easy to do functional testing, API testing, and virtualization. I would recommend this tool for anyone who has to do API testing or UI testing.

We use it for testing SOAP protocol API. We also started with the REST API recently. We use it to manually test as well as to automate a few API calls.

SoapUI provides us better usability and better features. People from different domains can use it effectively.

It clearly makes it easy to test APIs based on the SOAP protocol. We are a logistics company, and we have lots of tracking calls coming in. We provide APIs for tracking services, and it makes sense for us to use SoapUI to test them thoroughly.

There are no bugs or glitches, but a few features available only in the Pro version could be made available in the open-source version. Some of the features do not necessarily need to be only available to Pro users. The data generator would be really useful for the open-source version users.

The Pro version can be expensive for some companies.

For automation commands, it should be able to do what SmartBear is doing with ReadyAPI. They could filter on few things and pass on few things to SoapUI. The user database of SoapUI is bigger than ReadyAPI software.

As far as scripting is concerned, there should be consistency. For example, to declare a namespace, different syntaxes are used. Such things should be made consistent across SoapUI.

It is reliable. It has been good so far. 

It is easy to scale. We have around 18 people who use it. We have developers, QA, and customer support. We also have an E-commerce manager.

It is used very extensively because our major APIs are tested and deployed using SoapUI. Our customer care members use it for their day-to-day functions. They mostly use the manual part of it, whereas we do the automation part of it, which has the scope to grow.

If we are facing issues with the tracking calls or any other APIs that we have, a few members are trained to provide customer support. So far, we haven't come across things where we got stuck. They are usually user errors and not software errors.

I contacted SoapUi's tech support only once almost three years ago. I had emailed their tech support, and they responded fairly quickly.

I do the testing. I do not take care of the deployment. In its deployment, two developers were involved. All three of us are also responsible for its maintenance.

It doesn't take too long. Once it is deployed, I need to check if it works as expected, and the behavior is what is expected in production. 

It adds to the productivity of developers and QAs. So, there is definitely a return.

The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees.

I would definitely recommend it to others. It is super easy to master once you know what you need to do.

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10.

I use the tool for mocking, load testing, and developing. I use SoapUI Pro when the downstream is not available and we have to mock the downstream and continue our testing. I also use it to measure our application performance, etc.

I think their user-information sites should be better defined by SoapUI. For example, if I want to hit that virtualize server, let's say, with a 100K load — what is the bare minimum requirement? That kind of definition is not available anywhere. If that level of measurement could be given, that would be really helpful.

Tool-wise, I find no technical limitations as such. It's all as expected. It all depends on how much memory and how much you want to allocate. That's pretty typical for this type of solution.

I suppose the GUI could be slightly improved.

Right now, we don't have a way to capture the JVM stacks either for the virtualization or for the service when using SoapUI Pro for load testing.

I have been using SoapUI Pro for more than a year now.

Scalability-wise, it's okay. On a scale from one to five, scalability-wise, I would give SoapUI Pro a rating of four.

To be honest, I've never had to contact technical support; I just Goggle the answers to any issues I experience. I've never experienced an issue that required their assistance. It's a very simple solution to use.

If it could be sold as a bundle instead of by each individual component, that would be really great for the seller. It would be easy for us to understand what is included with the bundle.

I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SoapUI Pro a rating of eight. If the load and bare minimum could be defined, I would give this solution a higher rating. I don't expect a huge level of information, but at least a high level of information.

Overall, I think this solution is very cool and easy-to-use.

SoapUI Pro is a good tool when it comes to API design and orchestration. Additionally, it is beneficial for functional and for performance testing.

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 have used SoapUI Pro within the last 12 months.

SoapUI Pro is a stable solution.

The scalability of SoapUI Pro is good.

The technical support is very good. They are knowledgeable and responsive. I have contacted support multiple times. Whenever we had an issue with respect to some enhancement that we require we had a good experience. Some of the issues we had could be because of our lack of knowledge of the tool or the utility, however, they were quite helpful. The moment we sent a mail to support, without delay, they responded back. Whenever we interact with them, they will throw more light on how the way the solution can be explored or used better. Their team is good, they're always ahead of the race.

I rate the support from SoapUI Pro a four out of five.

The initial setup of SoapUI Pro 

The return on investment we have received is very good.

SoapUI has two versions, open-source, and commercial. You can use the commercial version or you can look for the open-source if you are trying to achieve basic steps out of the APIs. However, if you want to scale it up and want to integrate it with CI/CD seamlessly, then you should choose the commercial version.

I rate SoapUI Pro an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for automatic testing and API testing.

The solution is extremely flexible.

The API speed is quite good.

The solution offers excellent integration capabilities.

Stability has been an issue for us. It needs to be looked at and made a bit better.

The load testing performance needs to be adjusted. It could work much more effectively, in my opinion.

They should work on the pricing of the solution. Right now, we find it to be overly expensive.

I've been using the solution for five years at this point.

The stability isn't actually that great, especially in relation to libraries.

We've been satisfied with the scalability. It's able to expand if we need it to. We're considering increasing our usage as well, so we're looking forward to its capabilities in that respect.

The technical support that we get with the solution is quite good. We've been satisfied with it so far.

The pricing of the solution is quite high. Those who want to use the solution should just be aware that it does come with a bigger price tag.

We're just a customer. We don't have a special relationship with the company in any way.

The solution is quite good. I'd rate it overall an eight on a scale of ten.

I'd recommended it. One of the main things that's great is the excellent integration into the DevOps tool-chain and the reuse of code between SoapUI and LoadUI.