k6 vs. SoapUI Open Source, supported by SmartBear

[k6 (formerly Load Impact)] is well suited to run performance automated suites and to run stress tests, spike tests and load tests[.] We can run tests from recorded [sessions] but we cannot run npm modules and we cannot run nod js libs[.]

Incentivized

Good for simple requests, simple scripts, assertions, and small workflows. Also not bad with the Open Source version if savvy with code as you can do a lot with custom functionality.Free version has limited compatibility with scripts/projects created from the Pro version, but functionality-wise can probably be made up with coding. As such, the free version may not be too suitable for complex scripts or for those who are not familiar with coding as functionality/usability may be limited.

Incentivized

• Load testing
• Stress testing
• Performance testing
• Spike testing

Incentivized

• Ease of implementation
• Ease of use
• User friendly interface

Incentivized

• I would like to see k6 run in browsers
• I would like to be able to import npm modules
• I would like to see k6 has a GUI

Incentivized

• I actually like SoapUI as it is, I have not found things to improve, except for the speed of response is very complex services.

Incentivized

Compared to SoapUI, we have been using "light" tools like RestClient extension in Firefox, or Postman. Compared to Postman, SoapUI is more simple for WSDL / SOAP webservices, as SoapUI generate all envelop, but Postman does not. For Rest API, I think that Postman is a little above SoapUI, but not too far away.

Incentivized

• K6 make its easy to engage Devs in testing
• Extremely fast installation make it count for us
• Not using all system resources is a great benefit

Incentivized

• Testing resolves most of the issues in the development phases.
• User friendliness of the app makes it good.
• Overall client happiness depends on the clean project, which is possible by testing.

Incentivized