Postman free team plans are going away — what Postman alternative are QA teams using?

Discussions
,
1

Postman has announced that free team collaboration is going away, with the free plan now limited to a single user.

For QA teams, shared collections, environments, and test cases are often essential, so this change forces a real decision: pay, change workflows, or look for a Postman alternative.

We’ve been reviewing a few options recently, including tools like Apidog, Insomnia, Bruno, and even more Git-centric approaches depending on the team setup. Each comes with different tradeoffs around collaboration, test execution, and how closely things stay tied to source control.

There doesn’t seem to be a single “best” replacement it really depends on how your QA team works day to day and how much collaboration you need.

Curious how others here are approaching this:

  • Are you sticking with Postman and paying?

  • Moving to a Postman alternative?

  • Or changing your API testing strategy entirely?

Would be great to hear what’s actually working in QA teams right now.

4 Likes
2

Postman recently got banned in few organization when they made login to be mandatory to be used to use collection and similar features.

As this was causing your data stored in their cloud which you don’t want on a free account

So some options are

  • With the help of AI, convert your test to Restassured or a similar library and move to full code based solution

Also try hopscotch(free) / requestly(has free tier) apart from the one in your list already for POC,

  • go for that tool which has git like maintenance as its easier for collaboration
2 Likes
3

There is also Insomnia which is open source alternative to Postman.

4

We went through this quite a while back, basically when Postman started pushing more and more towards cloud sync security just said ‘No!’. A couple of different solutions were tried by various teams (not sure about Apidog, but Insomnia definitely had some fans), but Bruno pretty quickly won out as the new default.
I should point out that Postman was mostly used (and Bruno is mostly used) as a supplemental ‘exploratory’ API testing tool, and not generally relied on for full test suites (most of the regression tests running in our CI pipelines are ‘test as code’) so that might have skewed our results. But people generally find Bruno projects easy enough to share as part of bigger git repos which works well enough for what we need.

2 Likes
5

might be a good time for teams to rethink tooling -lightweight, git based or custom solutions can sometimes integrate better with automation pipelines. Tools like Rest assured or contract based tests can cover most needs without heavy collaboration platforms.

6

We’ve had similar experiences.

We tried Bruno and have been quite satisfied. It’s lightweight for sharing collections, and works well for exploratory testing. It also integrates nicely with credential managers like 1Password, and everything lives in version control; so no separate sharing infrastructure needed.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

7

we use Bruno and also SOAPUI