Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs ReadyAPI Performance comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 5, 2025

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

IBM Rational Test Workbench
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
19th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (15th), Test Automation Tools (36th)
ReadyAPI Performance
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Performance is 1.4%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1513668 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing
It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script.
Mahendra Andhale - PeerSpot reviewer
Open-source and flexible but needs client-side scripting
It's an open-source tool and supports a lot of plugins and custom code, which allows integration with other tools like Azure and AWS. Also, the APIs tested with SoapUI can be directly used, avoiding the need to create collections like in Postman. The client-side scripting, if incorporated, would provide a complete solution for performance tests. It can handle user distribution and transaction throughput distribution effectively.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"We can scale."
"We find the product to be scalable."
"It's like a centralized interface that allows us to increase the quality of our APIs."
"It's an open-source tool and supports a lot of plugins and custom code, which allows integration with other tools like Azure and AWS."
"he initial deployment process is easy."
"It stores good reports, as in, improved reports if compared with the SoapUI. It also has in-built security. You just need to switch and check the security testing. My team has never used it, but I know ReadyAPI provides those facilities as well."
"The performance and reporting of this solution have been its most valuable features."
"ReadyAPI automation can help us validate the functionality of most web services, allowing us to find out the exact number of defects before deployment to the user interface."
 

Cons

"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
"The solution’s interface could be improved."
"The client-side scripting mostly isn't needed for performance testing, however, if implemented, it would enhance the tool."
"I want the solution to be able to monitor Apache Kafka activity as well."
"This solution could be improved by offering artificial AI testing in addition to API testing. For example, we would like to have machine learning testing because when test applications, manual work could be completed automatically using this functionality."
"It is very slow sometimes."
"I'd not sure if they have the same level of documentation for performance and security testing."
"We need some time to understand and configure the solution."
"This is an area for improvement with the tool. We unnecessarily use JMeter for some website testing, which we would like to avoid by introducing this tool for API and load testing because it provides load testing features."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."
"This solution operates on a licence basis and the usage and cost varies according to the use case. It is more expensive if you include access to the learning center. On average it costs approximately 800 Euros."
"ReadyAPI Performance’s pricing is reasonable."
"We find the cost to be affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
845,849 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
33%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about ReadyAPI Performance?
It's like a centralized interface that allows us to increase the quality of our APIs.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI Performance?
Load UI is mostly free, and the pricing for the pro version is very affordable compared to other tools like LoadRunner.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI Performance?
The client-side scripting mostly isn't needed for performance testing, however, if implemented, it would enhance the tool.
 

Also Known As

Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server
LoadUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Financial Insurance Management Corp.
Mercedes-Benz, Adobe, Hilton Hotels, The Home Depot
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. ReadyAPI Performance and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
845,849 professionals have used our research since 2012.