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

IBM DevOps Test UI vs ReadyAPI Test comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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 DevOps Test UI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
26th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
11th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ReadyAPI Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
20th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 1.6%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 2.2%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ReadyAPI Test2.2%
IBM DevOps Test UI1.6%
Other96.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada
Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support
The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework. The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run. The reason is that changes were made to how it works with the browser and the startup takes some time. Adjusting those changes to speed up the load time will improve the solution.
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 most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"By automating regression test suites using this product, we were able to show time savings of more than 1200 hours in less than ONE year."
"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"As it is built on Ellipse/Java and costs less than other tools, it is recommended."
"Robust API provides quick turnaround for developers to understand and automate functional test case quickly."
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"The technical support is good; at least their response time is good, and whenever we ask them for help regarding deployment customizations, custom code implementation, or other code needs, they heavily support us, assign us IT engineers who work alongside us helping with code-related issues, and stay until the problem is resolved."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"The solution scales well."
"We chose this tool because it's lightweight, simple and intuitive."
"We run around 10,000 different validations, including database validations, and we can complete the entire aggregation in less than one hour."
"The solution offers excellent integration capabilities."
"It adds to the productivity of developers and QAs, so there is definitely a return."
"API mockups is a feature that quickly allowed us to have a working API mockup interface during the initial API discussion meetings."
"The advantage is that the product is handy for testers, user friendly; ability to use load, security tests or create mocks."
"SoapUI is very useful; before we started using SoapUI, we had to do everything manually, which is very time-consuming, and there were a few things we couldn't validate, but using SoapUI made everything easier, you can do six to seven hours of work efficiently, and it's more flexible to use."
 

Cons

"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"If in the future there is no support for mobile applications, then we will be using it less."
"It does not fully justify being a paid tool, and it needs improvement."
"The object repository used for identifying objects can be made better. It has been noticed that the RFT tool is unable to identify some objects, due to which we are unable to add them to the object repository."
"With version 8.5 we faced workspace crash issues frequently."
"If you look at today's current context, I wouldn't recommend RFT because there are far more advanced solutions and products available."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."
"The UI could be a bit more flexible."
"I have not been able to use this tool a lot of time, so I don't consider myself in a position to say what can really be improved."
"The licenses could be more flexible with regards to floating licenses."
"For automation commands, it should be able to do what SmartBear is doing with ReadyAPI."
"Grouping of the cases is not possible in SoapUI, to my knowledge. When working with critical cases or the, we were not able to group them properly. We can definitely create a suite and add them there, but within a whole suite, we have to identify them, which was not easy."
"SoapUI would benefit from some more customization abilities. It's a good interface, but it would be nice if they added the ability to build custom dashboards where the user can do their own bar graphs and pie charts."
"Sometimes it would get stuck, so we had to close ReadyAPI and then start it again."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."
"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."
"The cost is not that bad."
"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."
"It is free of charge."
"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."
"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."
"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Construction Company
14%
Marketing Services Firm
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise20
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Functional Tester
SoapUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edumate
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 IBM DevOps Test UI vs. ReadyAPI Test and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.