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 (11th), API Testing Tools (11th)
 

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 27.7%, down 35.2% 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 Virtualization27.7%
Parasoft Virtualize26.0%
OpenText Service Virtualization15.9%
Other30.39999999999999%
Service Virtualization
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ReadyAPI Test2.2%
Tricentis Tosca10.1%
OpenText Functional Testing6.8%
Other80.9%
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

"Service virtualization is beneficial as it allows system and integration testing to be done, without depending on a fully available environment."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"In terms of improving the way the organization functions, it gives us lot of visibility into what features are getting released when."
"We have already created and switched over 10,000 test cases from manual to automated execution, so our QA team can now focus more on complex manual test cases."
"Using the power of CA Service Virtualization, it is now possible to perform integration testing on every application build."
"Has lead to cost savings and helped improve the project life cycle."
"We used a lot of other solutions, but switched to CA Service Virtualization because this one tool can cover all of our requirements."
"It is introducing a lot more flexibility for us, reducing time scales to get to market, helping us cross-skill people and really bring that DevOps mentality into the bank, while virtualization lets us stand up versions of complex payment systems much cheaper and drive testing to be a lot leaner."
"The solution scales well."
"The utmost importance lies in the performance of the application."
"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."
"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."
"ReadyAPI has the power to enrich all the technical work, and you can achieve any complex task using ReadyAPI."
"I primarily use Soap UI to test XML/JSON requests and responses for APIs hosted by us and our vendors."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"SoapUI Pro is a good tool when it comes to API design and orchestration. Additionally, it is beneficial for functional and for performance testing."
 

Cons

"CA SV takes up lot of your system resources."
"They can always work on usability and making simple things simple to do."
"Pricing/licenses are very expensive, especially performance VSE, which is kind of foolish, especially if you use DevTest as a test driver too."
"Stability’s one area that needs work; it's good, but the challenge is that scaling at a very high level is slightly problematic at this point in time."
"The REST test step could include other methods."
"It is not a stable solution."
"The things that we're interested mostly are deployment kinds of capability."
"The GUI can be hard to navigate."
"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."
"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."
"I would like more documentation, training, tutorials, etc. Also, I don't particularly appreciate that I have to save everything."
"The UI could be a bit more flexible."
"The UI should be improved a little."
"I find that I'm fighting with the opportunities to order requests."
"The UI could be a bit more flexible."
"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."
 

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 are additional fees for advanced-level technical support."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"There is a yearly licensing cost, and I would give it a four out of five."
"ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten."
"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."
"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."
"It is free of charge."
"The cost is not that bad."
"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."
"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
896,467 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.
896,467 professionals have used our research since 2012.