CA Application Test, from CA Technologies, is a functional and performance testing tool.
N/A
OpenText UFT One
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Unified Functional Testing (UFT, formerly known as HP UFT and before that QuickTest Professional or HP QTP) is a functional and performance testing tool acquired by Micro Focus from Hewlett-Packard Enterprise, now from OpenText.
N/A
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
N/A
ReadyAPI (formerly SoapUI Pro, LoadUI Pro, and ServiceV Pro) is a REST and SOAP API functional testing tool that enables software developers, QA engineers, and manual testers to work together to create, maintain, and execute complex end-to-end API tests in their CI/CD pipelines without needing to code.
N/A
Pricing
CA Application Test
OpenText UFT One
ReadyAPI
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CA Application Test
OpenText UFT One
ReadyAPI
Free Trial
No
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
CA Application Test
OpenText UFT One
ReadyAPI
Considered Multiple Products
CA Application Test
Verified User
Professional
Chose CA Application Test
It definitely is among the top leaders in API testing and virtualization along with the Parasoft SOA tool. Many open source API testing libraries such as Rest Assured, Karate and even Postman and SOAP UI are free which is a little bit against CA.
We need to look at open source tools if the team has time to learn like Selenium.
Selenium can integrate with just about anything to give you a robust framework such as Maven for source code compilation, Test NG to drive tests, Jenkins or Hudson to integrate into a Continuous …
IF you are looking for api testing solution along with service virtualization, then look no further than this tool. This tool also forces you to move your testing lifecycle to much earlier phases of development which helps overall SDLC.
UFT is well suited if the price is not an issue, and if the requirement is about testing different technologies. If the application is based on Legacy platforms like Siebel or Mainframe, UFT fares quite well. For low cost web-based projects, there are other cheap and open source tools available. If it is about API testing or Mobile Testing, it is better to use other tools like TOSCA.
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.
It immensely helps to change your entire testing lifecycle approach and to implement Shift Left approach with the extensive emphasis on testing the api's.
This is a great tool to implement Service virtualization for your and/or third-party web services. This will ensure we have 100% environment availability and consistency for automation and performance test environments.
This tool also helps you with test data setup and management which is a very crucial piece of test automation.
It also helps us to implement performance testing for apis using the Blazemeter.
The simple front end will allow novice users to easily grasp the basics of automation and give them confidence to try things for themselves.
UFT can scale up and run across multiple machines from a single controller, such as ALM, enabling hundreds of tests to be executed overnight.
There is an active support community out there, both official HPE based and independent users. This means if you do encounter a problem there is always someone out there to help you.
The later versions have many add-ins to plug in to other tools within the QA world.
Expert users are able to utilise the many native functions and also build their own to get the most out of the tool and impress people as they walk past and see the magic happening on the screen.
UFT also has LeanFT bundled with it, allowing automated testing at the api level - if you can convince the developers to let you in there.
This tool comes with a license cost and not free. Many open source tools offer free api testing solution and so making some functionality of this tool as open source would be good
Load testing piece is not integrated with in the tool and rather uses Blaze meter which is free.
Some integration with UI and api testing will make this tool even more attractive
Its licensing cost is very high making it a very expensive tool. due to this many organisations are exploring options of license free tools like Selenium for automation. Though learning curve is large in case of Selenium but it is very cost effective & you an get lot of support online for Selenium.
Though the scripting time is less since its easy to create automation scripts, the execution time is relatively higher as it takes the lot of CPU & RAM.
Though UFT is quite stable but during long execution cycles we do get frequent browser crashing issues.
In terms of costing TestComplete is also one option which is not free but comes with modular pricing. You can buy what you need, when you need.
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.
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
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.
HPE are quick to reply and it's possible to get through to the actual developers shuold the case warrent it. Their online system allows updates and tracking of all incedents raised.
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
It definitely is among the top leaders in API testing and virtualization along with the Parasoft SOA tool. Many open source API testing libraries such as Rest Assured, Karate and even Postman and SOAP UI are free which is a little bit against CA.
1. It works solid for automate SAP and S/4 Hana applications and Fiori too. 2. Teams are well versed about UFT One 3. Able to handle maintained execution results 4. Publish Automation execution results in well manner to the leadership team/stake holders 5. More help content available 6. Able to understand non technical resources about normal view.
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.
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.
This tool gave a very positive ROI in our group. Especially with service virtualization where we minimized the downtime in our test environments significantly.
Also, service virtualization helps to minimize the costs of hitting third party services often in lower environments.
Reduces the total workload of keeping the team to test older (regression) functionality. QA testers can concentrate on ad-hoc and exploratory testing, saving time and effort across the entire project.
Has built a better infrastructure for the client applications on which we can rely on for stability and providing regression results for any new features being developed.
Led the applications a step closer to implementing agile practices and DevOps across the entire organization. Thus, providing a better turnaround time of new features to the customers and less maintenance headaches for the BAU team to address.
