ReadyAPI Performance Reviews

The primary use case is to conduct server-side performance tests, scalability tests, and endurance tests using SoapUI and Load UI.

It's an open-source tool compatible with automated APIs in SoapUI, which can be directly used in Load UI for performance testing.

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.

The client-side scripting mostly isn't needed for performance testing, however, if implemented, it would enhance the tool.

In my project, it's pretty much stable, so I haven't faced any stability issues.

The community is strong and provides numerous answers to queries.

Neutral

The initial setup is simple and straightforward, essentially a 'next, next, next' process.

Load UI is mostly free, and the pricing for the pro version is very affordable compared to other tools like LoadRunner.

I have used LoadRunner before, where you can't capture the complete response, just the runtime response.

I would rate the overall solution a seven out of ten based on client-side scripting. Though not needed for performance, it could be an improvement.

We use ReadyAPI for API testing. The APIs are the communicator factor, services, and web services, which we create in a REST model. The REST APIs are there. So we use this ReadyAPI to test our services, which we created using REST.

We do some user/user testing there. We do change the services as well. For example, our company is basically on the banking side, so we do FinTech service creation. Therefore to test FinTech services, if you want a complete example of the user journey, then we create a few services for customer creation. To inquire about the same customer, we do have other services. To modify or delete the same customer, we have another service. 

So we use this product to check the user journey for the services, We do all the changes using the ReadyAPI. For all the variables, whatever we use, we use ReadyAPI.

We used to use SoapUI for manual testing. We only used to do manual testing, however, then, when we considered ReadyAPI as a tool, we bought some licenses for it, and we started doing some automation using ReadyAPI.

Eventually, we enhanced the whole automation, and how it should get integrated with the hardware, or another tool like Jenkins for CI/CD automation. That is the reason we switched over. That's the best benefit we've seen.

Personally, I like two features. The first is adding multiple assertions. Another is having the ability to change the services and provide some variables.

The solution is pretty straightforward to install.

We find the product to be scalable. 

For the most part, the solution is stable. 

When we wanted to install the ReadyAPI on Unix or Linux environment, we found it to be really difficult. We had difficulty installing the license there since it is headless. We could not do the installation for these two environments. That is why we were not able to do a headless integration. It would help if that was possible. 

It is very slow sometimes. If they could improve its performance, it would be really great for the users.

This is an expensive product. There are other options that you can use for free. 

I've been using the solution for around four years. 

The performance could be better as it often is quite slow. 

While the solution is stable, sometimes we don't understand that the latest version is available. And due to some time constraints, like priorities surrounding the projects, we cannot install the latest version of ReadyAPI. And if we don't install the latest version of it, it starts behaving a little weirdly, like slower than usual, or it can crash sometimes. 

We have 30 users on the solution right now. 

It is a scalable product.

We use the solution on a daily basis. We may not expand usage. We are also looking for some other applications or tools, since ReadyAPI needs licenses. That is the reason we are planning on moving onto some other tool, which is open-source.

Mostly, support is fine. We found, while installing the licenses, we got a quick response from the technical team. However, I forgot how to install the repair license on the Linux and the EMS environment. If that information, was more readily available, I'd say I'm happy with the technical support of it.

Before ReadyAPI, we used to use SoapUI. We wanted to enhance the automation and SoapUI was manual.

It is really not so hard to install. If we download the latest version from Google or somewhere else, we can install it easily. The license installation is simple, so I don't think it's difficult to install.

We have about 30 people that can be involved in a deployment. 

How long it takes to deploy the product depends on if we have small use cases for execution. In that case, it takes less time. However, for huge bulk data, where we are using bulk data and huge amounts of data, take more time for deployment and execution.

We do the executions and deployments on a weekly basis. We get the reporting software and use report portals. If there is anything for us to do when we get the report, we only fix the glitches there. Therefore, there is some ongoing maintenance and tasks to handle once it is set up.

We bought our licenses from SmartBear only.

The cost is in a higher range, and that's the reason we are planning to move. Otherwise, performance-wise it is good. If the price will reduce, we might stay. We have many other applications and tools available in the market, which can be considered as replacements for ReadyAPI, and they're free, so why pay?

I cannot speak to the exact cost of the solution in general. However, there are no additional costs or fees that you need to pay, beyond the license itself. 

We are looking into different products as we may move away from this solution in the future. 

We need a product or maybe a tool that can be used for API testing. Basically, right now, for my team and my product, we do API creations and we need a tool that we can use for API testing. We want something open-source. 

We're an end-user. 

It is deployed on a cloud now. We have all services, APIs, which had already been deployed on the cloud, and the ReadyAPI's being used to test the same services.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

We use the solution for validating the web services for the code which we are receiving from the onshore team. We configure the ReadyAPI automation with the web services. Then we validate the web services, such as providing the request and response, if the web services and the backend are working correctly. We are also using open banking services to validate the validity of these services. We are sending a request and getting a response for that request.

ReadyAPI automation has helped us find many bugs and defects before deploying our code into the user interface. This is very helpful for us, and I would recommend that teams deploying code into user interfaces validate their web services through automation using ReadyAPI. We have done some automation such as creating an account by the backend to the ReadyAPI automation tool. This has been very helpful for us.

Compared to SoapUI, the ReadyAPI automation is very useful for us because ReadyAPI is the new version of SoapUI. I know that this tool is very helpful for us to find the defects and to run the web services accordingly.

We get what we are expecting with the solution. ReadyAPI commissioner has fulfilled all our requirements. I don't believe there are any drawbacks at the moment.

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. This will save time during the execution phase before we deploy it to the user interface.

I have been using the solution for 15 months.

The latest version of the solution is stable. We have had no issues.

We have some errors that are not part of ReadyAPI automation. However, we may be experiencing issues with our configuration. This is what we are suspecting is the root of some of our problems.

I give the scalability of the solution a nine out of ten.

We are currently using 70% of ReadyAPI automation for web services. However, 30% of our testing is still done manually, with no plans to scale up.

We used the SoapUI tool to evaluate some of the payment exhibitions through the SoapUI tool and REST APIs such as Postman. However, ReadyAPI automation is a better tool than Postman for testing and validating both the SoapUI and test API services.

I give the initial setup a four out of ten, because first of all, we need to understand how the ReadyAPI automation works. We need some time to understand and configure the solution. After that, if everything is configured properly, then it is very easy to use the solution. Deployment usually takes around one to two hours to configure the new software, because we need to understand when we need to get the configuration from the developer team and configure it accordingly. 

We need one or two people to deploy the solution. We now use around five people for automating ReadyAPI, but for configuring the solution, one or two people are enough. One is usually sufficient, but in some cases, two may be recommended. 

During the implementation, we used open banking from a third party, for which we are getting the code. We configured the data accordingly, and we tested it in-house. 

The license for the solution is annual.

We find the cost to be affordable.

I give the solution a ten out of ten.

The number of people needed for a project depends on the complexity of the project and the configuration. For example, the number of test cases and use cases that need to be executed can affect how many people are needed. In our case, one or two people are sufficient for the configuration regarding the code which we are receiving and configuring according to the ReadyAPI automation.

We haven't approached the technical team for the ReadyAPI automation because we already have a ReadyAPI automation expert on our team. We haven't had any chance to get any issues resolved by the technical team at the ReadyAPI commission.

The solution is a very good tool wherein we can validate all the web services and is compatible with both SoapUI and REST API. That is very helpful for us.

We have test cases set up in ReadyAPI and we use it with Swagger. We are a software development company and we used to use ReadyAPI to test our internal applications. We mostly create the backend application based on the API and mobile or web applications that use these APIs. We also used to develop our own APIs. 

We have now expanded our usage and also include quality assurance. For example, for functional testing, we start calling the URL and check the HTTP code and error code. We also check the format and input and then process the output. 

Our overall use case and usage of this solution varies from project to project.

The performance and reporting of this solution have been its most valuable features. ReadyAPI measures virtual user or TPS transactions per second. When using other applications, you have to create the load to reach a higher level of TPS or higher level of the concurrent user call. When you are dealing with ReadyAPI, you can view a very specific report that it can show you the TPS and DPS per second.

We can access very specific and significant reports that are related to test cases. You can define parallel test cases for a different situations or scenarios that you can define. 

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 testing applications, manual work could be completed automatically using this functionality.

In a future release, we would like to see additional functionality added to the basis licence. 

I have been using this solution for five years. 

This is a stable solution. We have not had any problems with stability or experienced any crashes of the application. 

This is a scalable solution. It offers a lot of capacity and integration with many different applications. 

I would rate the customer support for this solution a four out of five. 

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. You can make use of the UI tools that are provided or you can use scripting testing based on the Java script and Groovy, for example. Ready API supports both of these approaches. 

We have experienced a ROI when using this solution. 

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. 

The good thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a learning center and community with lots of videos on YouTube and other media. This helps become familiar with the tool and all of its abbreviations and terminology. ReadyAPI also offers standard testing scenarios that makes it easy for new users.

I would recommend this solution to others. They should just take their use case and the licensing costs into consideration. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

We use ReadyAPI Performance for performance test cases and automation. It allows us to create and execute the automation function, security, and performance test. It's like a centralized interface that allows us to increase the quality of our APIs. The solution is used for the improvement of the API.

The solution’s interface could be improved.

I rate ReadyAPI Performance an eight or nine out of ten for stability.

I rate ReadyAPI Performance an eight out of ten for scalability.

I required the technical support team's help while importing the API for a particular schema, and they responded quickly.

Before ReadyAPI Performance, I used the Postman tool.

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

ReadyAPI Performance’s pricing is reasonable.

I am using the latest version of ReadyAPI Performance.

ReadyAPI Performance is deployed on-cloud in our organization. I would recommend ReadyAPI Performance to other users.

Overall, I rate ReadyAPI Performance an eight out of ten.

I was using it for API testing. I was not using it to do any performance testing.

It's for API validation. I was working on a banking project and I used it to check the response time.

It has helped improve productivity and functionality.

The assertion part was good. That is the most basic thing if you want to test anything that is needed for validation. That was very useful.

Many of our utilities we can import. We can add external libraries that are supported by the tool. 

They have very good documentation.

It's stable.

We can scale. 

We haven't really run into any issues. 

I'd not sure if they have the same level of documentation for performance and security testing. 

I've used the solution for around three years. 

It's a very good tool. We haven't had issues with stability. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

I didn't use it for performance. It's scalable in the sense that we can add licenses. I did not use any free version at any time. 

We're extensively using the solution and may expand usage if needed. 

I've never contacted technical support. I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

Earlier, we used SoapUI, and the name changed to ReadyAPI. There was also LoadUI, a load-testing solution. 

Even for security testing and for performance and API evaluation, everything, we were using ReadyAPI only.

How straightforward or complex the solution is depends on the complexity of our use cases and how many fields there are. It's not dependent on the tool as such; it's basically our product and its functionality.

It doesn't take much time, and you don't really need anyone's assistance. You can manage the setup with one person. 

We did not need any third parties, although we did have different teams internally working on the implementation. 

We just use it to test products. We do not witness any ROI.

I'm not sure of the exact pricing. This is handled at the organizational level. However, I do not believe it to be expensive. In terms of affordability, I would rate it four out of five. You just pay for the license. There are no extra costs. 

Before leaving my previous company, I did explore Postman. My company was taking me to test other tools and see how user-friendly they were.

The company is a customer and end-user. 

I was using a licensed version of the product. I'm not sure what the last version was that I used. 

It's good to do API testing. This solution will help. 

It's good to go over the documentation before using the solution.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I primarily use the solution for monitoring tasks. 

It's helped us improve our ability to monitor effectively. It's helped improve our productivity.

The visibility it provides is excellent. 

The initial deployment process is easy.

It's a stable product.

It can scale. 

I want the solution to be able to monitor Apache Kafka activity as well.

I've been using the solution for one year. 

The solution has been stable and also reliable. The performance has been good. 

There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's a scalable product. If we need to expand it, we can. 

We have around five people using the solution right now. 

I've never spoken to technical support services for any reason. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they would be. 

The solution is straightforward and simple to deploy. The implementation process is not complex at all. It's easy.

The deployment itself is very fast. It only takes maybe five minutes. 

I can't speak to the exact price. I don't deal with licensing aspects of the product.

I'd recommend the solution to other users. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I'm a test lead person so we have multiple teams who work under me and they use WebView API, other members use LoadRunner, and some members just use other automation techniques. They use Selenium and Java automation.

It provides many features. It facilitates load testing, operational volume testing, spike testing for the APIs, and the API is very fast 

It stores good reports, as in, improved reports if compared with 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.

I have used JMeter but for load testing for local website testing. I'm not sure whether this particular tool supports all the websites connected to testing as well.

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.

It supports the APIs but not for the websites. It would be good if that feature is integrated into the solution. 

I have been using LoadUI for one and a half years. 

It's a stable product. 

I am not the one who handles their technical support. My team has not raised any concerns about the support team. If they did, they would raise the concern. 

They have good documentation and blogs on the internet. 

The initial setup is not very complex. For testers, they have to create their test cases and scenarios within ReadyAPI, and there they simply go for the load testing. It's automatically created. 

There should be a free testing version that should be offered for free for students. Not free for enterprises but for the student level so that they can get transparency and can become familiar with it. 

SoapUI partnered with SmartBear who offers this for free under their platform. 

There should be a student version of this platform in which a student can get their hands dirty in order to get some expertise.

For an enterprise, the price is fine. Some features are at a very high level, especially with reporting, they should just disable those right away for the student level.

One free month is not enough to fully evaluate the solution. I would need more time to explore the features. They should offer a free student version in order to help expand their community. 

I would rate it a nine out of ten. It is a very good product. 

It's a very good and handy product. There are so many features. It's getting more popular day by day. 

In the next release, they should include website testing, especially load testing. I don't think it supports it right now.

I'm comparing it with JMeter. JMeter also supports load testing themselves. If I'm paying the price for using the software, it would be better if I could use those features where I can discard the open-source ones.