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

"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"Very easy to create virtual services for test, Dev and training environments."
"LISA VSE and Test Cases."
"One of the things I like about it is it actually does what it claims to do."
"The most valuable feature is that it's available 24/7."
"Easy to understand ways of creating stubs."
"Unit testing or early life testing did not have to be stopped or delayed because those services were not available."
"Using the power of CA Service Virtualization, it is now possible to perform integration testing on every application build."
"In my personal experience, Soap UI NG Pro added a lot of value to our product."
"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."
"The advantage is that the product is handy for testers, user friendly; ability to use load, security tests or create mocks."
"I've majorly worked on SoapUI Pro, LoadUI and Service Pro and found all of them equally useful and very easy to understand tools."
"SoapUI Pro is a good tool when it comes to API design and orchestration, and it is beneficial for functional and for performance testing."
"For us this has meant increased test coverage, better system security, less test execution time and above all a greater quality product."
"Great tool. Makes API testing super easy to set up and use."
"I primarily use Soap UI to test XML/JSON requests and responses for APIs hosted by us and our vendors."
 

Cons

"IMS services in version 7.5.2 are quite unstable."
"The workstation component has a very out-dated UI and is in dire need of a facelift."
"The things that we're interested mostly are deployment kinds of capability."
"UI testing needs improvements."
"The user interface and usability of the tool is not the best. They could definitely be improved upon in the next release."
"Cross-browser support is not that good for that portal."
"I have noticed performance issues such as the virtual server requires a restart after using it for a certain amount of time, to make sure it responds better."
"As far as the next version of it is concerned, probably some additional lightweight, portable elements."
"When it comes to scalability, SoapUI has some room for improvement right now."
"The tools that are stated by SmartBear speaks for itself, but when it comes to improvements, there could be a release which only aims for the development of beginners in terms of understanding the tools that are laid by SmartBear."
"Automation features are not user-friendly."
"Could integrate the graphing module for load testing."
"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."
"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."
"The UI could be a bit more flexible."
"Occasionally, when you are saving, the solution can hang."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is a yearly licensing cost, and I would give it a four out of five."
"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."
"It is free of charge."
"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."
"ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten."
"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."
"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."
"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."
"The cost is not that bad."
"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.
896,034 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
17%
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.
896,034 professionals have used our research since 2012.