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

ReadyAPI Test vs SmartBear TestComplete 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

ReadyAPI Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
21st
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (10th)
SmartBear TestComplete
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
9th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 0.5%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.8%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Faiz Ahmed - PeerSpot reviewer
You can achieve any complex task with this tool
There aren't any plugins for UI automation. You need to make a custom code and download a job to put into the libraries. If it were panelized, then it would be straightforward. It should be in a panel of the tools, so you can add those tools as your test step in your test cases. For example, it would be nice to have a Selenium plugin available from the menu, where I can select "open browser" and provide the URL. That URL would be immediately open in the browser. This is like a keyword, and then the Selenium plugin should be there.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution offers excellent integration capabilities."
"The solution scales well."
"The out-of-the-box support for the database is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, it's easy to use and easy to teach to others."
"The tool’s scalability is very good."
"One good feature is SoapUI's URL check, which allows you to check among the applications. I'm not just talking about the ones for Android. It has all kinds of multi-world tests that are really helpful."
"The solution has some good scanning features."
"The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"The solution has a very nice interface."
"The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules."
"Runs in different remote machines. We have multiple versions of the software being tested."
"It's cross platform automation capabilities specially ranging across web, UNIX (via putty), and other systems."
"The product has many features."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"It is very easy to maintain tests with this tool. It covers all necessary items in the test plan. The most painful item in testing is maintenance. When changes occur, the tests should be maintained."
"It works very fine. It is fast on almost any machine, and it is also very well organized. I like its object mapping and its capability to find and interact with almost everything that exists on Windows."
 

Cons

"We tried automation but it's not easy to integrate with the synching and some of the mission tools that we use for automated testing of APIs."
"I would like more documentation, training, tutorials, etc. Also, I don't particularly appreciate that I have to save everything. It takes up a lot of space on my laptop, but I have to install the WSDL again If I don't save it."
"The UI could be a bit more flexible."
"There are no bugs or glitches, but a few features available only in the Pro version could be made available in the open-source version. Some of the features do not necessarily need to be only available to Pro users. The data generator would be really useful for the open-source version users."
"Occasionally, when you are saving, the solution can hang."
"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."
"If the load and bare minimum could be defined, I would give this solution a higher rating."
"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."
"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."
"The learning curve of the solution's user interface is a little high for new users."
"It is very hard to read the test log generated by TestComplete Executor if the log file is very big. TestComplete Executor is a small tool for just running the TestComplete test framework (not for developing)."
"The artificial intelligence needs to be improved."
"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
"In SmartBear TestComplete the integration with Jenkins could be easier. Additionally, some of the controls could have better customization options. For example, if a grid is used and it contains multiple controls within it, it can be a checkbox, radio button, or any kind of control, the way the Object Spy is operating currently there is a lot of room for improvement."
"The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."
"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."
"The cost is not that bad."
"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."
"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."
"It is free of charge."
"ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten."
"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."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"The solution's pricing is too high."
"My advice so far, is that while it’s not quite as powerful and easy to use as UFT, its price tag more than makes up for it."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"Buy modules on demand. If you have a four-person team and they will each automate tests only 25% of the time, it's better to buy a floating licence and share the tool during the work day."
"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."
"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
14%
Insurance Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about SoapUI Pro?
The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SoapUI Pro?
ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten.
What needs improvement with SoapUI Pro?
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 b...
What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I don't know much about the pricing, however, I think it's cheaper.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing.
 

Also Known As

SoapUI NG Pro
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Apple, Cisco, FedEx, eBay, Microsoft, MasterCard, Pfizer, Nike, Oracle, Volvo, Lufthansa, Disney, HP, Intel, U.S. Air Force, Schindler
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
Find out what your peers are saying about ReadyAPI Test vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.