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

CrossBrowserTesting vs ReadyAPI Test comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

CrossBrowserTesting
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ReadyAPI Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
21st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (10th), API Testing Tools (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.4%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 2.3%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ReadyAPI Test2.3%
CrossBrowserTesting1.4%
Other96.3%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

CN
Senior DevOps Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Knowledgeable support, scalable, and stable
We use CrossBrowserTesting for testing our web-based applications We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve. I have used CrossBrowserTesting within the past 12 months. CrossBrowserTesting is stable. I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable.…
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

"The CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA."
"It has increased the speed of our regression testing."
"Our site's conversion from a static to an adaptive flexible layout was a major goal for our web site, and CrossBrowserTesting was an invaluable tool for trying out that new code."
"The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."
"It helps to speed up the process to test the product in different devices and browsers, making it easy to troubleshoot some issues."
"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes."
"The solution offers excellent integration capabilities."
"The solution has some good scanning features."
"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."
"ReadyAPI has the power to enrich all the technical work. You can achieve any complex task using ReadyAPI. I can also do UI automation with ReadyAPI. In a few test cases, we want to check the API and the equivalent UI. I download a job and write a piece of Groovy or Java code. It's almost the same in ReadyAPI. I can do that in a single test case. ReadyAPI is a powerful tool because you can do anything you want, but only you need to download the right set of jobs and produce the right set of code."
"I've majorly worked on SoapUI Pro, LoadUI and Service Pro and found all of them equally useful and very easy to understand tools."
"The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"The solution saves us a ginormous amount of time; we used to write our own solutions, from small scripts to task web services, so this saves us thousands of hours."
"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."
 

Cons

"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"Automated testing could be improved."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default."
"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."
"When it comes to scalability, SoapUI has some room for improvement right now."
"SoapUI Pro is a little heavy due to the number of features. Previously it was not that heavy."
"Better integration capabiliites with a range of Test Management Systems (not that it is not possible using the API) where a range of aspects are considered such as housing of the project, sharing (some capabilities here), versioning of projects, automatic saving of run information and results (again this can be done in test suite setup but would be great to view in a test management system)."
"Occasionally, when you are saving, the solution can hang."
"Sometimes it would get stuck, so we had to close ReadyAPI and then start it again."
"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."
"If the load and bare minimum could be defined, I would give this solution a higher rating."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."
"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"It is free of charge."
"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."
"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."
"My understanding is that the pricing is okay, however, that's taken care of by our procurement team. It's around $5,000 for three years."
"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."
"The cost is not that bad."
"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."
"ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Performing Arts
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Construction Company
15%
Insurance Company
6%
Marketing Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise20
 

Also Known As

No data available
SoapUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
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 CrossBrowserTesting vs. ReadyAPI Test and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.