No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Broadcom Service Virtualization vs ReadyAPI Test comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Broadcom Service Virtualiza...
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Service Virtualization (1st)
ReadyAPI Test
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (22nd), Regression Testing Tools (12th), API Testing Tools (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Broadcom Service Virtualization is designed for Service Virtualization and holds a mindshare of 29.6%, down 35.5% compared to last year.
ReadyAPI Test, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 2.2% mindshare, up 0.5% since last year.
Service Virtualization Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Broadcom Service Virtualization29.6%
Parasoft Virtualize27.0%
OpenText Service Virtualization14.7%
Other28.700000000000003%
Service Virtualization
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ReadyAPI Test2.2%
Tricentis Tosca10.8%
OpenText Functional Testing6.3%
Other80.7%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

DM
Senior Project Manager at Infosys
Can be used for the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance
We use it for the virtualization of third-party APIs for performance testing. Our second use case is related to the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance, which is used for insurance clients In the case of the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party…
Luis Sanchez - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Quality Assurance Test Engineer at Dormakaba
Helps in data, regression, performance, security, and functional testing
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.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"There are several areas that are easily configurable."
"Using service virtualization has reduced the time for each CI cycle from 4 - 5 hours to under 1 hour."
"We viewed CA Service Virtualization as a game changer, giving us the ability to add test environment virtualization in order to reduce test cycles for our clients."
"CA provides very good support for their product, and was extremely helpful in both of the organizations where I installed the product."
"You can create virtual services from a live recording or you can even take raw traffic and convert that into request/response pairs, and you can create an entire virtual service from just those simple little files, and that's super awesome when that all works out."
"It has helped our organization in term of its availability and being able to create systems immediately."
"Testing using Service Virtualization saved huge amounts."
"Service virtualization is the most valuable feature to me; it helped us to start the performance testing activities much earlier in the testing life cycle."
"ReadyAPI has the power to enrich all the technical work, and you can achieve any complex task using ReadyAPI."
"We used to write our own solutions, from small scripts to task web services, so this saves us thousands of hours."
"Using SoapUI's automation suites to run all our test cases saved us a lot of time."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"Overall, I think this solution is very cool and easy-to-use."
"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."
"API mockups, functional testing, and load testing are valuable features."
"The solution has some good scanning features."
 

Cons

"I would really like more relevant online documentation."
"They can always work on usability and making simple things simple to do."
"There have been some issues with Service Virtualization, but I would have to ask the team for more specific details."
"It’s a good product, but comes with a hefty cost. If there is a better licensing/cost negotiation, then it can work, otherwise it’s not a viable solution."
"Sometimes, different versions of tools differ in behavior and new versions don't completely provide backwards compatibility."
"The solution required a lot of CPU memory, but using enough PC OZU fixed the problems."
"The GUI can be hard to navigate."
"The biggest challenge I've had is upgrading."
"Stability has been an issue for us."
"The product is a good solution for functional back end testing, but the price should be lower due to already mentioned problems, bugs."
"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."
"Automation features are not user-friendly."
"Working with Git needs to be improved. SoapUI 1.8.0 has this annoying habit of touching or changing many files that are unrelated to a test developer's actual change."
"I am not really a fan of the Ready Pro version even though I am sure it offers a lot."
"The UI could be a bit more flexible."
"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't have the exact dollar amount, but we have spent close to $1,000,000 for a three-year agreement, for an enterprise level."
"There is a yearly licensing cost, and I would give it a four out of five."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"There are additional fees for advanced-level technical support."
"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."
"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."
"The cost is not that bad."
"It is free of charge."
"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."
"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
886,719 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Marketing Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Insurance Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise98
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise19
 

Also Known As

ITKO LISA, CA LISA, CA Service Virtualization
SoapUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Union Bank, Swisscom, Autotrader, KPN, ING Bank, Best Buy, American Family Insurance, TESCO, Telefonica, Molina Healthcare, California DMV, Aktia, City Index, Con-way, DirecTV, GRU Airport, Liquidnet, NAB, Nordstrom, T-Mobile, TIM Brasil, 
Apple, Cisco, FedEx, eBay, Microsoft, MasterCard, Pfizer, Nike, Oracle, Volvo, Lufthansa, Disney, HP, Intel, U.S. Air Force, Schindler
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, Tricentis, Parasoft and others in Service Virtualization. Updated: March 2026.
886,719 professionals have used our research since 2012.