We performed a comparison between ReadyAPI and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has the ability to combine it with different CI/CD tools."
"When we are doing API testing we have found it to be very efficient to receive results. Additionally, you are able to do tests directly from the API."
"It's easy to automate for more data-driven testing."
"The initial setup of ReadyAPI is straightforward."
"The performance testing capabilities are very good."
"ReadyAPI's best features are that it's user-friendly and its behavior-driven development is flexible."
"The Excel sheet feature is good."
"A single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and service actualization."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them. The are other features that SmartBear TestComplete has but the competition widely has them as well."
"The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules."
"The ease-of-use and quality of the overall product are above average."
"It is a strong automation tool for desktop, browser, and API testing."
"In TestComplete, I saw a conformed package of a tool that kept everybody in consistency. The team was able to regenerate further tests without having to manipulate more code because the record feature is great."
"In terms of features, I have already raised different change requests on the ReadyAPI side. One of the largest functions I've requested is the validation of the payload for the REST APIs."
"To generate a test suite in API, I had to create a separate one each time because otherwise it was 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."
"The Property Transfer capability could be more user friendly because it is a bit difficult to understand."
"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."
"Sometimes, if I changed something in ReadyAPI, it would not quickly pick up the change. It used to give me the same error repeatedly, and when I closed the application completely and restarted it, it would pick up that change."
"The performance in some cases needs improvement. Sometimes it requires too many resources."
"ReadyAPI's customer support isn't that great, particularly their response time."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"Stability issues occurred only when connecting to the SourceSafe. Sometimes, after getting the latest version, the tool hangs and it should be reopened in order to recover."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"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."
"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)."
"Error handling features in the tool are a little limited."
ReadyAPI is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 71 reviews. ReadyAPI is rated 7.8, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ReadyAPI writes "Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, ReadyAPI Test and Parasoft SOAtest, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, OpenText UFT One and Telerik Test Studio. See our ReadyAPI vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.