No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Akamai CloudTest vs ReadyAPI comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Akamai CloudTest
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
13th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (14th)
ReadyAPI
Ranking in Performance Testing Tools
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Performance Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Akamai CloudTest is 3.1%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 3.1%, up from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ReadyAPI3.1%
Akamai CloudTest3.1%
Other93.8%
Performance Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Vinod Patil - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager - Performance Architect at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Is user-friendly and offers live monitoring
Extending the same cloud tool to make it app native so that it can help with device performance testing towards HTTP requests and responses. If you can have a front-end tool like Google's Core Web Vitals, it would be great. If you have some integration with Google's Core Web Vitals, it would be great. I want the tool to have IP spoofing because whenever you do load testing, you will have a little bit of static IP based on a particular load generator. If we have an option of just making the real-time scenario, like having IP spoofing, and the range of IPs dynamically gets changed with the request just to mimic the real-time user behavior, then it would be a good improvement. Having integration to APM tools, like Dynatrace or AppDynamics, the way we have in the load tools, would be good.
PK
Lead QA Engineer at Msys Technologies
Experience effective testing with flexible licensing alongside pivotal insights on essential improvements
For non-functional testing, I focus on performance and security. For performance and security tests, I used REST API, SoapUI, and JMeter. These tools help us conduct thorough testing across these dimensions. I find ReadyAPI helpful especially in overcoming security issues, as we experienced slowness in the application after merging our JAR files. For instance, if a person wants to access a university database and encounters a timeout error, we learned through ReadyAPI that the issue was due to HTML protocol limits with the payload. We fine-tuned this process to display the expected data effectively. I consider ReadyAPI a cost-effective solution because it covers three verticals without needing to purchase separate tools for security, performance, or functional testing. ReadyAPI is a versatile tool for creating multiple testing frameworks and validating various parameters seamlessly. REST API is the tool I use to test all three types of articles, meaning I validate the APIs I send to my peers or clients for functional testing, and I also perform security testing to ensure the URL and data passed through multiple components adhere to policies and user privileges. This is done through functional security testing using the REST API tool, and for performance, I ensure that applications can be accessed simultaneously by multiple users without hindrance or slowness through thorough performance testing.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The level of support is quite good and the integration is also very flexible."
"Akamai Cloud Test provides detailed analysis during load and performance testing which helps in determining different components of our platforms and external integrations with other vendors needs optimization (i.e.) it highlights exact API call with request, response, error, TTFB to identify root cause of failure which in turn helps in improving time to resolution and prioritize change requests."
"From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest. Because when we compared CloudTest with Performance Center, cost wise it was a better solution. It is easy to use as well, and you can definitely get an automation engineer or a performance engineer with very little exposure to any programming or scripting language such as JavaScript. I would definitely recommend this solution and would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten."
"The solution is very stable."
"The tool is very user-friendly, so you can save a lot of time in terms of your preparation activities."
"The solution was easy to set-up and much more easy and intuitive to build performance tests."
"From my own experience, if you're talking about load testing and performance testing then definitely you should go for CloudTest."
"Soasta CloudTest is an integral part of our performance testing strategy and key in generating load across geography."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities."
"ReadyAPI is pretty straightforward and offers many helpful features, and many things automatically get integrated into it so it is quite a useful tool."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the scripting tools and the connectivity to external data sources, such as Excel and PDF files. There are plenty of useful features that are useful, such as automating flexibility and usability. Overall, the solution is easy to use."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the ready-to-use assertions and filters which can perform the validation. If we want to filter out any value, the filters are available. Apart from that database integration, if you want to go ahead and perform validation in the database layer it is possible with the ready-to-use feature available. The execution and reporting are rich features."
"I definitely like ReadyAPI; it is a good tool and it's easy to use."
"The main advantage is that it could be integrated into different CI/CD tools, and that is something that is really valuable and helpful."
"It's great for those that don't have as much exposure to programming."
"The most valuable feature is being able to run each version for test suites."
 

Cons

"I couldn't say, as I haven't used it outside the training or applied it to any project yet."
"In terms of improvement, I think integration of these tools with the leading EPM tools would be good. It would help to seamlessly integrate to Dynatrace or AppDynamics to understand what the profiling looks like when generating a load."
"Resource consumption also needs to be worked on. When we generate a thousand or two thousand concurrent users, we need to optimize the load generator resource utilization."
"It's a manual process to whitelist respective internal IPs in coordination with web operations team to access Soasta. Availability of any standardized tool from Soasta will make setup process easy."
"The UI gets stuck sometimes; pulling huge load test data takes time and the UI often gets stuck."
"If we have an option of just making the real-time scenario, like having IP spoofing, and the range of IPs dynamically gets changed with the request just to mimic the real-time user behavior, then it would be a good improvement."
"One of the challenges with Soasta is availability and quick access to their technical support documentation and on-call support."
"Akamai cloud test integration into our current CI/CD pipelines (i.e.) identify and resolve the issues during the sprint phase which helps in delivering an absolute product and reduces time to market/release."
"The reporting in ReadyAPI could be better. It can become sloppy, sometimes it works and other times it does not."
"Lacking flexibility of adding more custom verification for security testing."
"There is room for improvement in ReadyAPI, particularly in the user interface."
"Many users will consider this solution expensive compared to the layout. It is more expensive than other solutions."
"I would like to see a better dashboard for monitoring in the next release of this solution."
"The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved."
"It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today. Other solutions have an in-built mechanism where I can directly and easily connect. An API is more around a user submitting a request on the frontend. It then hits the backend, puts the data, and responds back. If I am hitting MongoDB or NoSQL databases, I do not have ready-made inbuilt solutions in ReadyAPI that can easily help me in automating it faster. In our organization, we deal with NoSQL databases, and therefore, we need Groovy. We just cannot have a connector from ReadyAPI to do that. I have to write Groovy scripts. If you have themes that are predominantly using MongoDB, it leads to more maintenance and support activity because we are introducing more code into our commission. In terms of additional features, it can have cloud support. This is one of the things where we are getting into cloud support. We'll see how it works, but it is one of the doubts that we still have."
"Version control does not work well."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a yearly license, and I would give it a rating of three out of five."
"The tool's price is at an intermediate level. When you compare it with other enterprise load testing tools, it falls under the average category."
"Running cost is very low."
"For each license, they charge the same amount, which is less than $1,000 for each desktop license."
"There are costs in addition to the licensing fee. For example, if you want to add the load testing you would pay more."
"The price of the solution has been fine."
"It is expensive. Each user needs to be licensed, and there are different licenses within the product. It starts with 750 euros for a single user per year, but for the full product features, you need to pay a lot more. There are three versions. This cost is for functional testing, and then there is a cost for load testing and virtual services. If you want to use these areas with the functional test license, you are limited. You hit some limits in these functions. If you have all three licenses, then you have full functionality for the API."
"The pricing is very competitive."
"We use fixed licenses, and the last time I checked, I want to say it's around $680 per seat per year."
"ReadyAPI is moderately priced, with added costs for more plugins."
"If I remember correctly, ReadyAPI costs between $5,000 to $7,000 for five thousand virtual users running it at a given point in time. Other tools, for example, Apache JMeter, can run millions of users at a given time. ReadyAPI is a tool that requires you to pay more money if you want more users to run it for performance testing. For functional testing, each ReadyAPI license costs $1,000, and you do get basic testing, and it's inclusive of one hundred users. In my company, if there's a need for more than one hundred users, my team uses Apache JMeter because it's futile to end up paying $5,000 or $6,000 annually just for performance testing, which can be done in Apache JMeter as well. Given the circumstances, my team does performance testing only towards the end of the fiscal year when the regulatory testing of applications takes place. If I have to run ReadyAPI just for two days or just for ten or fifteen odd days, then it's not worth paying $5,000 for the license with the small number of users provided by ReadyAPI."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Retailer
10%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise28
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI?
Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs. License prices can be a factor in considering which technologies to adopt.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI?
One issue I found with ReadyAPI is related to event listeners compared to JMeter or SoapUI. We created an in-house dashboard to display automation runs across projects, which required manual updati...
What is your primary use case for ReadyAPI?
My experience with Katalon Studio is that we used Katalon for one of our projects, and then I started leveraging Katalon by integrating it with AI tools, AP tools, and aptly tools. Aptly tool is an...
 

Also Known As

SOASTA CloudTest
Ready API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Chester Zoo
Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai CloudTest vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.