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 (20th), Regression Testing Tools (10th), 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 26.7%, down 33.3% compared to last year.
ReadyAPI Test, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 2.3% mindshare, up 0.5% since last year.
Service Virtualization Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Broadcom Service Virtualization26.7%
Parasoft Virtualize25.7%
OpenText Service Virtualization15.9%
Other31.700000000000003%
Service Virtualization
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ReadyAPI Test2.3%
Tricentis Tosca9.8%
OpenText Functional Testing7.2%
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

"DevTest supports multiple testing environments so you can configure it to use one testing environment or 20, and you can change it for use in any other environments with the flick of a button."
"The product made a huge impact in the market which includes many solutions which offer virtualization, performance testing, pathfinder, and functional testing, and development and testing became faster, improving CSR and ROI's for our customers."
"It is easy to use, has a faster time to market, and provides flexibility."
"This helps my team in virtualizing responses so we are not dependent on the systems when they are down."
"CA Service Virtualization has helped us advance the development cycle when third-party interfaces are not available to us."
"Think “outside the box” when you think about how this product can be used."
"We have been able to enact a shift left in our testing, and thanks to CA Service Virtualization we now have the ability to stub services we rely on and can test our own APIs in an efficient manner."
"The benefits are cost savings on hardware and earlier defect identification."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"We chose this tool because it's lightweight, simple and intuitive."
"In my personal experience, Soap UI NG Pro added a lot of value to our product."
"The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"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."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, it's easy to use and easy to teach to others."
"The solution scales well."
"SoapUI Pro is a good tool when it comes to API design and orchestration, and it is beneficial for functional and for performance testing."
 

Cons

"The UI is a pain point. If they had a better UI, it would have a much higher rating."
"Right now, we can do service virtualization but there is no mainframe testing feature in this tool such as batch processing; it is the feature that I need."
"IMS services in version 7.5.2 are quite unstable."
"We had to implement an external service catalog. We put it in ServiceNow. I would like to see an integrated service catalog."
"​From a reporting perspective I think we would like to have a more user-friendly approach."
"They can always work on usability and making simple things simple to do."
"It was purchased from another larger corporate project and just kind of sat there, paid for but on the shelf."
"The product is yet to become stable. Thus, people prefer using more stable solutions like JMeter and SoapUI."
"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."
"In the LoadUI companion the scripts are not user friendly, and it also has a slow startup time."
"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."
"Automation features are not user-friendly."
"Sometimes it would get stuck, so we had to close ReadyAPI and then start it again."
"Sometimes you have to reload the project when you are moving/reorganizing tests in a project."
"We tried automation but it's not easy to integrate with the synching and some of the mission tools that we use for automated testing of APIs."
"The UI should be improved a little."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are additional fees for advanced-level technical support."
"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."
"The cost is not that bad."
"ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten."
"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."
"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."
"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."
"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
896,563 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Marketing Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
7%
Insurance 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 Enterprise20
 

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: May 2026.
896,563 professionals have used our research since 2012.