We performed a comparison between Broadcom Service Virtualization and ReadyAPI Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, OpenText, SmartBear and others in Service Virtualization."It is easy to use, has a faster time to market, and provides flexibility."
"The ability to create virtual services and deploy them as Docker containers, and include them in our Jenkins build pipelines, is a valuable feature."
"We had a number of back-end services that were not available during testing times. What this had allowed us to do is get our early life testing done while those services are not available."
"Helps us to remove barriers that we have with dependencies on services that we don't own, or services that don't even exist yet."
"Unit testing or early life testing did not have to be stopped or delayed because those services were not available."
"You can have a lot of different people with different technologies use the tool, without any programming experience at all, all the way up to people who can program. And then, the more technical that you are, the more programming you have, the more you're able to customize the tool."
"We have been using it extensively for the shift left process and testing. It helps us to accelerate and virtualize services and assets that we don't have. It enables to test faster."
"You can create virtual services from a live recording or convert raw traffic into request/response pairs."
"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."
"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."
"The solution offers excellent integration capabilities."
"The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on."
"It's a very simple solution to use."
"They can always work on usability and making simple things simple to do. This is true of every product that deals with complexity."
"We had to implement an external service catalog. We put it in ServiceNow. I would like to see an integrated service catalog."
"CA actually releases a new version every year. We had issues with the upgrade prior to the latest one."
"I really want to see more of the "express" kind of model, where you get a little bit for free. I'd love to be able to see you be able to edit and author tests without having to be connected to a licensed server. And then, if you want to go and execute tests, then you go and connect to the server... I think it would unblock people to be able to do a lot more work from home or from remote places, where they can't really connect to the server."
"More examples of portal-based virtualization."
"I'd like to see more of the newer technologies included in there, looking mainly from a mobile perspective, possibly, so you can virtualize some of the aspects that we're going to be doing for mobile testing."
"UI should be more user friendly: better usability, more testing oriented."
"I would like to have more flexibility towards the mainframe virtualization and also in JDBC virtualization."
"The current interface is unsatisfactory."
"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."
"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."
"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."
"The UI could be a bit more flexible."
"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."
"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."
"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."
More Broadcom Service Virtualization Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom Service Virtualization is ranked 1st in Service Virtualization with 97 reviews while ReadyAPI Test is ranked 15th in Functional Testing Tools with 31 reviews. Broadcom Service Virtualization is rated 8.2, while ReadyAPI Test is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Broadcom Service Virtualization writes "Feature-rich, easy to configure and set up, and the support is good". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI Test writes "You can achieve any complex task with this tool". Broadcom Service Virtualization is most compared with Parasoft Virtualize, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server, OpenText Service Virtualization and Tricentis Tosca, whereas ReadyAPI Test is most compared with Postman, ReadyAPI, Tricentis Tosca and Apigee.
We monitor all Service Virtualization reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
