Likelihood to Recommend ACCELQ can support multiple technologies such as web, mobile, API, and mainframe. It’s also suited for SAAS solutions such as Salesforce and addresses challenges such as dynamic HTML. It’s easy to set up, and onboarding is easy, and overall lead time is comparatively less. The overall execution results are captured with screenshots, and it’s easy to debug errors. It has integrations with leading cloud-based desktop and mobile farm services such as Saucelabs, browser stack, etc.; ACCELQ is not developer friendly, and hence the overall adoption for a continuous integration scenario is very limited. If you are using a different test management solution, the integration between accelQ and that tool needs ti to be built and hence requires additional development effort, and it’s buggy too.
Read full review As stated, we do a LOT of API testing, the swaggerhub import makes it easy to add APIs. This is very well-suited, as well as easy management of the steps/cases/suites inside of ReadyAPI. The one thing I do wish ReadyAPI was better suited for is changes to data, we have a lot of test cases in ReadyAPI and if we make a change to how the backend data is structured, one-by-one adjustments need to be made to the steps. Less appropriate, UI testing.
Read full review Pros Scriptless and hence coding is easy. Maintenance of the scripts are easy. Learning curve is small. Read full review Ease of use (ability to automatically import API definitions, Jenkins integration for running in the pipeline). Detailed test reports (allow to easily identify weak spots during both functional and performance testing). One platform for all tests (allows to closely couple and reuse existent tests). Read full review Cons The tool is not developer friendly and hence adoption across developers is low. The tool does not have an admin console to manage the users centrally. Different types of licensing and it’s all user based and hence pricey. Read full review Needs good documentation Need to improve the performance of the tool Setup is very complex and for such [a] commercial tool, it should easy and straightforward Tool says it supports security testing but in reality, it is not at an extensive level. Read full review Likelihood to Renew The only reason this isn't a '10' is because of the cost. This product is definitely meant for organizations who are serious about making sure they invest in the full ecosystem of API design, development, maintenance. But there is a significant cost associated with this investment. and because of this cost (and the non-tangible output for executives), it is a difficult line-item to justify in this post-pandemic environment.
Read full review Usability SoapUI allows us to combine multiple tests and adhere to the sequence that they need to run in order to complete successfully. It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing
Read full review Reliability and Availability Soap UI has managed to continuously build on it's solid foundation and keep improving by each release. It is by far the most dependable and accurate testing tool out there of its kind. Available via connecting to VM's created as SoapUI test machines give access to it anytime, anywhere practically.
Read full review Performance It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing.
Read full review Support Rating To be honest, we didnt had much issues with the support, as there is already plenty of online communities available for help. But if ever there were some minor issues with the membership or the certificates, the tech support was always quick and efficient enough to resolve the issue ASAP
Read full review Implementation Rating no very easy but lacks documentation
Read full review Alternatives Considered When we implemented ACCELQ, we conducted POCs with many similar solutions. Among the tools we pursued at that time, accelQ stood out against Tricentis Tosca and QMetry automation studio. However, subject 7 did better. However, they were still in the nascent stages of building the tool, and hence we did not pick it.
Read full review ReadyAPI provides intuitive GUI capabilities compared to their own open source product. When compared to
Postman , ReadyAPI also supports SOAP based services, which is a saver especially when integrating with legacy or other third party systems.
Read full review Scalability It has an excellent GUI design and the reporting mechanism is also very good. It does consume a lot of memory though during concurrent testing. However, I have read that added monitoring tools have been added, which if so the 7 could possibly go to a 8 or 9.
Read full review Return on Investment Overall adoption of an automation tool went up. Migration of existing selenium scripts to ACCELQ was relatively easy and less effort. Lack of overall admin console and hence managing the agents across different execution is difficult. Integration between accelQ and any test management tool can be difficult and buggy in most cases, even though it can be coded. Read full review Very quick regression testing, hence having the testing results very soon, even the same day of deployment for same above reason, it can save money for corporation (so no tedious, costly and erroneous manual testings) The test reports are compatible with TestNG, so the corporation can integrate the reports in our Autamation frameworks such as Allure or Jira Zephyr Read full review ScreenShots