ReadyAPI Reviews

We use ReadyAPI to build our own testing cases. We are able to use the same testing cases to complete automation tests, performance test team and security tests at the same time.

This solution is very intuitive. Once you finish your first few testing cases, you can change several parameters and create lots of testing cases. You could use the same testing cases for different purposes such as automation, performance and screen testing.

Many users will consider this solution expensive compared to the layout. It is more expensive than other solutions.

I have used this solution for a year and a half. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

This is a lot of documentation provided for support but they still need some important information to be added. For this reason, I check other communities discussions and forums.

I would rate the support team a six out of ten because they haven't always been able to solve my issue. 

Neutral

It is easy to install, but it takes time to set up your testing environment. You need to figure out how your API works and save the mutual authentications. You need to know the specification of your API partner and this takes time. It is not difficult to maintain.

I introduced the solution to my previous company. I just read the documentation and then got started.

It is more expensive than other API testing tools. For example, Postman is an open source tool and is free to use. ReadyAPI is a commercial tool and licenses. need to be purchased. It costs approximately $200 000 Taiwan Dollars for three years.

I would rate the pricing a six out of ten. 

I have used Postman before, but not for a long time. I definitely prefer ReadyAPI. It is very easy to use and it's very easy to learn. They also offer online virtual training and certifications. 

The documentation provided is good but it could be more comprehensive. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

We mainly used the different applications of API. It's data-driven, so I had to create the Excel sheet and then loop it through the test suites. We were running each version, which was helpful.

Our organization doesn't have many servers due to security compliance.

The most valuable feature is being able to run each version for test suites.

To generate a test suite in API, I had to create a separate one each time because otherwise it would just override the test. Each API had to be added separately. I thought I could just have one and then create different methods, but I had to add each API separately to create the test for that. That is an area that could be improved.

It would be nice to have some kind of automation or organization.

I used the latest version of this solution for about six months.

It was okay. There were one or two times the solution closed on me but otherwise it was fine.

The scalability is okay.

Support was good.

Setup was fine, but I needed to have some meetings with support to complete the integration with Azure DevOps.

The price was around $6,000 for one license, but I don't remember exactly. It is definitely expensive. Our organization was planning on having multiple licenses for this year.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10. I definitely like ReadyAPI. It is a good tool and it's easy to use.

We are using this solution for API testing on HL7 messages for healthcare.

It's easy to learn how to use it.

Version control does not work well. It's has a git API which is defective and doesn't work well with our version repository, Bitbucket. We do all version control using git bash (command line driven), and sometimes we have to try several times to as there still hooks into the ReadyAPI git API which cause issues.

I have been using ReadyAPI since April 2020.

I don't find it to be that stable. Sometimes it stalls, shuts down or you have to shut it down and restart it.

We haven't scaled it. We have approximately nine people using this solution in our organization.

SmartBear does not take phone calls. You have to email them if you want something resolved. It's a lot of back and forth through email, which takes a long time.

I am not impressed at all with SmartBear. We don't want to purchase any of their products going forward.

HP ALM - support is not good and the yearly license was very expensive - also not an easy tool to build API tests as we were using Service Test.

Licensing costs are yearly.

There are costs in addition to the licensing fee. For example, if you want to add the load testing you would pay more.

Not for API testing as we already had ReadyAPI - another team was using it for adhoc testing

It's not stable. The Git API within ReadyAPI is a a GUI front end to make it easier to do version control but it doesn't work well as mentioned.

It's not reliable. I would not recommend this product, as there are better products out there.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We have a lot of external vendors that we integrate with, so we need to validate all of the APIs. Also, we need to mark those services that don't need external vendor integration.

We are at the initial stage of using this product, and although we have a plan, it is too early to assess and recognize the benefits.

We like the user interface.

The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools.

They have interfaces with our performance tools, so we were able to leverage all of these integrations and plugins. It is very good from an integrative solution standpoint.

The reporting is not very robust and needs to be improved. They give the pass or fail criteria, but we need to know the history and also why it has failed. Essentially, the details that we see in other tools are missing. This is a request that we have made and we hope that these are implemented in the next version.

They should include support for integrating with Xray, which is another test management tool. More generally, they should have a larger scope when it comes to integrating with test management tools.

We recently acquired the license for ReadyAPI and have been using it for the past three months.

We have not found any bugs or glitches so stability-wise, it is good enough for us to use.

The scalability is good. We have eight people in the IT department who use this product. There are four in development and another four in the QA team.

The interaction that we have had with Smartbear has been pretty good. They are responsive, and they can give an action item as well as a timeline for when it can be implemented.

I would rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Prior to using Ready API, we were using Postman.

Postman is only for manual API testing, but when it comes to ReadyAPI, we can automate it using Groovy Scripts. We also have a plan to use Service Pro and LoadUI. These are the reasons that we selected ReadyAPI.

The initial setup was straightforward. All we had to do was configure the license server.

Our plan includes a need to filter out all the API, middle-tier bugs. This is the initial phase of development. We don't want to find any bugs in either UAT or UAP. That's an objective for us, but right now, we are setting up the team and people are working on it.

My advice for anybody who is implementing ReadyAPI is, to begin with establishing a framework of what they want to achieve. Comfort with the framework is more important, before acquiring the license.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We were using ReadyAPI for performance testing and creating mocks but there were some issues in terms of scaling, so we are no longer using this solution.

The most valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it is user-friendly.

We stopped using this solution because of issues with scalability. Performance and memory management both need to be improved because other solutions use less memory for the same amount of data.

I think that there was an open-source version, with a lower cost, then this would be a recipe to get into bigger markets.

I used ReadyAPI for about one year.

I think that this is a stable product.

ReadyAPI is not as scalable as other solutions, such as Karate. More resources, especially in terms of memory, are required for the same amount of data.

The scale does not only refer to the number of users. It concerns the applications and how often they make calls to different servers or mocks. 

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

The implementation was done by my team.

It took about a week to deploy because it involved more than just an installation. There was connectivity to configure and it had to be integrated with existing testing frameworks.

We migrated back to Karate about six months ago. It is more scalable and has more plugin features. There is also the point of cost because ReadyAPI requires licensing and Karate is open-source.

I would recommend this solution to people who need official support. For companies who have experts in open-source technology, they can avoid using ReadyAPI. I think that it would come down to the specific client, or project.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The primary use case is for APIs and API testing.

The feature I find valuable is project management. It allows us to organize our test cases and suits inside the project. It also gives the ability to store the variables in terms of properties so they can be used across test cases and test suits, so they can be placed at the project level or test suit level, or test case level.

It is challenging doing upgrades and patches because sometimes the environmental variables or suits in the projects get erased. The solution can be improved by adding redundancy to protect the data from being erased. I would like to have the database integration like using the JDVC improved. The last thing would be a more user-friendly way to update the definition and refactor the definitions.

I have been using the solution for three and a half years.

The solution is stable.

The solution has met our requirements and appears to be scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward. I give it an eight out of ten for simplicity.

Before choosing the solution I evaluated Postman. The selling point for the solution over Postman is the project management features.

I give the solution a seven out of ten.

I manage a testing team made up of four people including myself that use the solution daily.

ReadyAPI's best features are that it's user-friendly and its behavior-driven development is flexible.

Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions. ReadyAPI should also include the ability to add and modify existing files.

I've been using ReadyAPI for almost fifteen years.

ReadyAPI is stable.

The initial setup is straightforward for anybody with experience.

ReadyAPI is moderately priced, with added costs for more plugins.

I would rate ReadyAPI eight out of ten.

I primarily use ReadyAPI to convert APIs into functional test cases and to manage customer information.

ReadyAPI's best features are user-friendliness, smooth integration with Postman, the speed of creating test cases, and integration with customer data.

An improvement for ReadyAPI would be automated import/export with third-party tools. It can also be hard for new testers to learn.

I've been using ReadyAPI for six months.

ReadyAPI is stable.

ReadyAPI's customer support isn't that great, particularly their response time.

The initial setup is very easy.

ReadyAPI requires a product license and a subscription, which is renewable every year or three years. Its pricing is very reasonable, unlike more expensive competitors like Tosca, XPlant, or Catalon.

I would advise anybody thinking of implementing ReadyAPI to install the trial version and go through the tutorial so that they can learn how the solution works. I would rate ReadyAPI as eight out of ten.