If you're trying to pick an API client in 2025, it’s easy to get stuck between familiar names like Postman and newer tools like Insomnia, Hoppscotch, and Bruno.
We used Oden to analyze public G2 reviews, Reddit discussions, and official pricing pages so you don’t have to open 30 tabs.
This breakdown focuses on what actually matters: reliability, collaboration, security posture, pricing, and how each tool fits into a modern API workflow.
By the end, you should know which platform best fits your team’s size, stack, and risk tolerance.

Which API development and testing platform has the best ratings?

Ratings snapshot (G2)

Note: G2 ratings change over time; numbers below are from late 2025 and may shift slightly.

How to read this:

• Postman has by far the most validated score: thousands of reviews plus a 4.6 rating. (g2.com)
• Insomnia trails slightly on rating and volume, but still looks solid. (g2.com)
• Hoppscotch and Bruno have great scores but with very small N; they’re more early‑adopter tools than statistically “top‑rated” ones yet. (g2.com)

On Reddit, you see a clear pattern: many developers feel Postman and Insomnia have become heavier and more cloud‑centric over time, and are actively looking at lighter, privacy‑friendlier tools like Bruno and Hoppscotch. (reddit.com)

Bottom line on ratings:

• If you care about proven reliability and ecosystem, Postman wins.
• If you care about philosophy (open‑source, Git‑native, offline), Bruno and Hoppscotch have unusually enthusiastic early communities, but less data.

How much do API development and testing platforms really cost?

Pricing comparison

Cost patterns:

• Postman is the most expensive per seat, but includes the most “platform” capability (governance, networks, AI add‑ons, deep integrations). (postman.com)
• Insomnia undercuts Postman on list price while offering serious collaboration, SSO, and governance in Enterprise. (insomnia.rest)
• Hoppscotch is aggressively priced for teams: $6/user/mo for organization features is much cheaper than Postman or Insomnia’s paid tiers, though its ecosystem and governance story are more limited. (hoppscotch.com)
• Bruno is structurally different: core is free and local‑first; paid options today are mostly one‑time/perpetual, not classic SaaS seats, with new subscriptions emerging. (docs.usebruno.com)

If you’re buying for a 20+ person team, per‑seat differences compound fast. For a 20‑user team on annual billing:

• Postman Basic: 20 × $14 ≈ $280/mo
• Insomnia Pro: 20 × $12 ≈ $240/mo
• Hoppscotch Org: 20 × $6 ≈ $120/mo
• Bruno: core usage still free; Golden/Pro pricing depends on how many advanced seats you actually need.

What are the key features of each platform?

Postman

Core positioning: A full API platform for designing, testing, documenting, monitoring, and governing APIs across teams and partners. (postman.com)

Key Features:

• API client covering REST, GraphQL, gRPC, WebSockets, and more. Source: Postman API Platform
• Collections, environments, scripts, and CLI (Newman) for automated testing and CI/CD. Source: Postman docs
• API Builder and Spec Hub for OpenAPI/AsyncAPI schemas, with Git sync support. Source: Postman collaboration docs
• Mock servers, monitors, and automated test runners. (postman.com)
• Private and Public API Networks for internal cataloging and external developer distribution. (postman.com)
• Workspaces with granular roles and live collaboration. (learning.postman.com)
• AI assistant Postbot for test generation, debugging, and docs (paid add‑on). (postman.com)

Best For:

• Teams that want one platform for the full API lifecycle (design → test → govern → distribute). (postman.com)
• Enterprises needing SSO, RBAC, audit logs, governance policies, and API networks. (postman.com)
• Organizations with lots of public or partner APIs.
• Teams who value rich documentation, monitor uptime, and integrations with tools like Azure API Management, GitHub, and Slack. (businesswire.com)

Insomnia (Kong Insomnia)

Core positioning: An open‑source, collaborative API development platform from Kong, focused on multi‑protocol support, automation via CLI, and secure collaboration. (insomnia.rest)

Key Features:

• Multi‑protocol client: REST, GraphQL, gRPC, WebSockets, SSE. (insomnia.rest)
• OpenAPI‑first API design with live preview and automatic generation of collections, tests, and mocks. (insomnia.rest)
• Unlimited collection runs and scripting with pre‑request/after‑response hooks. (insomnia.rest)
• Inso CLI for integrating testing and linting into CI/CD and Git workflows. (insomnia.rest)
• Flexible storage: local‑only, Git‑backed, or cloud sync, with optional end‑to‑end encryption and private sub‑environments. (insomnia.rest)
• Collaboration features: projects, organizations, RBAC, real‑time presence, SSO, and domain‑based invite control on higher tiers. (insomnia.rest)

Best For:

• Teams that want open‑source tooling with serious collaboration features but don’t need Postman’s API Network or ecosystem. (insomnia.rest)
• Organizations already using Kong Gateway, since Insomnia integrates tightly with Kong workflows. (konghq.com)
• API teams caring about storage control (local vs Git vs cloud) and secrets governance (vault integrations, E2EE). (insomnia.rest)

Hoppscotch

Core positioning: A developer‑first, open‑source API development platform that’s lightweight, browser‑friendly, and built for teams. (hoppscotch.com)

Key Features:

• Multi‑protocol API client supporting HTTP, GraphQL, WebSocket, Socket.IO, MQTT, SSE, and more. (hoppscotch.com)
• Workspaces, collections, folders, and environments for organizing requests. (hoppscotch.com)
• Pre‑request scripts and post‑request tests in JavaScript. (hoppscotch.com)
• Real‑time collaboration, access‑level roles, audit logs, SSO, and admin dashboard for organizations. (hoppscotch.com)
• Cloud‑hosted option (Hoppscotch Cloud) plus self‑hosted Community and Enterprise Editions for data‑sensitive teams. (docs.hoppscotch.io)
• Desktop apps (Mac/Windows/Linux), web app, browser extension, and CLI. (hoppscotch.com)

Best For:

• Developers who want a fast, modern, open‑source alternative to Postman that works great in the browser. (hoppscotch.com)
• Small teams that need collaboration, but not full enterprise governance.
• Orgs that value self‑hosting and open source but don’t want to maintain a heavy tool. (docs.hoppscotch.io)

Bruno

Core positioning: A Git‑native, offline‑only, open‑source API client designed to keep all API data on your machine and in version control. (docs.usebruno.com)

Key Features:

• Local‑first: collections are plain‑text .bru files in your filesystem; no cloud account, no sync, no telemetry. (docs.usebruno.com)
• Native Git collaboration: you share and review collections just like code. (github.com)
• Graphical desktop app plus Bruno CLI for automation and CI. (github.com)
• MIT‑licensed core; Golden Edition adds proprietary features, including support for advanced protocols and performance/load testing. (docs.usebruno.com)
• Used by other vendors (Sage, commercetools, Trustpilot, etc.) who publish official Bruno collections. (developer.sage.com)

Best For:

• Teams with strict data‑residency or compliance rules (e.g., PCI) who don’t want API data in a vendor cloud at all. (docs.usebruno.com)
• Devs who love Git‑driven workflows and want requests versioned alongside code. (github.com)
• Organizations looking for a low‑cost, open‑source alternative that can still plug into modern pipelines via CLI. (unirises.com)

What are the strengths and weaknesses of each platform?

Postman

Strengths:

• Mature ecosystem and adoption: Over 30–40M users and hundreds of thousands of public workspaces and APIs on its network. (g2.com)
• End‑to‑end platform: API client, design, mocking, testing, monitoring, governance, and distribution in one place. (postman.com)
• Rich collaboration: Workspaces, commenting, live sessions, fine‑grained roles, and API networks for internal and external stakeholders. (learning.postman.com)
• Enterprise‑grade features: SSO/SCIM, audit logs, advanced RBAC, private API network, security add‑ons, and enterprise SLAs. (postman.com)

Weaknesses:

• Heavier and slower than lightweight clients; many G2 reviewers mention lag with large collections or long sessions. (g2.com)
• Highest per‑seat price in this group, especially at scale. (postman.com)
• Cloud‑centric by default, which can be a negative for teams that want everything strictly local or Git‑only without relying on a vendor SaaS. (You can mitigate this with higher‑tier controls, but it’s extra work.)

Insomnia

Strengths:

• Open‑source with strong multi‑protocol support (REST, GraphQL, gRPC, WebSockets, SSE) and unlimited collection runs. (insomnia.rest)
• Flexible storage options: work locally only, use Git as source of truth, or use cloud sync with optional E2EE. (insomnia.rest)
• Good collaboration/value mix: real‑time collaboration, orgs, RBAC, SSO, vault integrations, and enterprise governance at a lower list price than Postman. (insomnia.rest)
• Tight integration with Kong Gateway and Kong ecosystem for full API lifecycle. (konghq.com)

Weaknesses:

• Smaller review footprint on G2 (15 reviews) compared to Postman’s thousands; less third‑party validation. (g2.com)
• G2 reviewers and community posts mention limited built‑in automation/docs vs Postman and some friction with org and Git workflows. (g2.com)
• Some Reddit threads complain about UI clutter and increased reliance on cloud accounts in newer versions, mirroring criticism of Postman. (reddit.com)

Hoppscotch

Strengths:

• Lightweight, fast, and browser‑based by design; no heavy desktop dependency for basic usage. (hoppscotch.com)
• Open‑source and self‑hostable, with a free Community Edition and enterprise‑grade self‑host options. (docs.hoppscotch.io)
• Team‑ready features at low cost: workspaces, real‑time collaboration, access roles, SSO, audit logs, and admin dashboard with a $6/user Org plan. (hoppscotch.com)
• Good multi‑protocol support (REST/GraphQL/WebSocket/etc.) with scripting, codegen, and CLI. (hoppscotch.com)

Weaknesses:

• Very small volume of commercial reviews on sites like G2 (only 1 review as of late 2025). (g2.com)
• Being browser‑first means you can run into CORS and browser limitations unless you use the desktop app, proxy, or extension—an issue noted in at least one Reddit discussion. (reddit.com)
• Governance and ecosystem are less mature than Postman’s; you don’t get an equivalent to Postman’s API Network or as many third‑party integrations yet. (hoppscotch.com)

Bruno

Strengths:

• Privacy‑first and offline‑only: no accounts, no cloud sync, and no ability for the vendor to collect your API traffic; all collections live as files on disk. (docs.usebruno.com)
• Git‑native collaboration: collections are just files, so they fit cleanly into Git repos, code review, and branch workflows. (github.com)
• Fully open‑source core (MIT) with a growing ecosystem of official collections from other vendors. (github.com)
• Users on G2 and Reddit repeatedly highlight it as a lightweight alternative after frustrations with Postman and Insomnia’s bloat or cloud requirements. (g2.com)

Weaknesses:

• Feature coverage is narrower than Postman/Insomnia: examples include weaker CSV‑driven testing and gaps in edge features, noted by early adopters. (reddit.com)
• Ecosystem and community are smaller; far fewer third‑party tutorials, integrations, and enterprise stories compared to Postman. (You mainly see developer‑oriented blog posts and early adopter chatter.)
• Pricing and packaging are in flux as the team transitions from Golden Edition to Pro/Ultimate; if you’re risk‑averse about pricing changes, you’ll need to track their updates. (blog.usebruno.com)

How do these platforms position themselves?

Postman:
Markets itself explicitly as “the world’s leading API platform,” with a focus on full lifecycle coverage (design, test, document, monitor, govern, distribute) for organizations of all sizes. (postman.com)
The messaging is squarely aimed at platform and enterprise teams—governance, networks, AI, and integrations are first‑class.

Insomnia:
Calls itself a “beautiful API collaboration platform” and “open‑source API development platform,” emphasizing modern multi‑protocol support, real‑time collaboration, and tight integration with Kong. (insomnia.rest)
The target buyer is a security‑sensitive, engineering‑led org that values open source and Kong’s infrastructure story.

Hoppscotch:
Brands as a “developer‑first API platform” and “collaborative open source API development platform.” (hoppscotch.com)
The emphasis is on speed, simplicity, and openness: browser‑first UX, open‑source code, self‑hosting, and collaboration at a low price point.

Bruno:
Presents itself as “a fast and Git‑friendly open‑source API client” and stresses being offline‑only with no cloud or telemetry—data never leaves your machine. (usebruno.cz)
It deliberately positions against “cloud‑first” incumbents, appealing to devs and companies that want Git-native, privacy‑maximizing tooling.

Which platform should you choose?

Below are pragmatic recommendations based on the data above, not vendor marketing.

Choose Postman if:

• You want a single, opinionated platform for the entire API lifecycle (design, testing, documentation, monitoring, governance, and distribution). (postman.com)
• You need enterprise‑grade governance—SSO/SCIM, RBAC, audit logs, API networks, and compliance reporting. (postman.com)
• Your team publishes public or partner APIs and cares about discoverability through a large API network. (postman.com)
• You’re okay paying a premium per seat in exchange for ecosystem maturity, integrations, and support. (postman.com)

Choose Insomnia if:

• You want an open‑source tool with strong multi‑protocol support and robust testing/mocking capabilities. (insomnia.rest)
• You like the idea of storage flexibility (local‑only, Git‑only, or cloud sync) and want to keep sensitive data off vendor clouds when needed. (insomnia.rest)
• Your org already uses or is considering Kong Gateway and wants tighter integration between design/testing and gateway deployment. (konghq.com)
• You need SSO, RBAC, domain capture, and vault integrations—but at a lower price point than Postman’s enterprise tiers. (insomnia.rest)

Choose Hoppscotch if:

• You want a fast, browser‑friendly, open‑source client that does 80% of what you use Postman for without the heaviness. (hoppscotch.com)
• Your team prefers web‑native collaboration (workspaces, real‑time editing) and doesn’t yet need heavyweight governance or an API network. (hoppscotch.com)
• You want self‑hosting to keep data on your own infrastructure but still have a modern UI and team features. (docs.hoppscotch.io)
• Budget matters: you’d like collaboration and SSO at around $6/user/mo, substantially below Postman/Insomnia. (hoppscotch.com)

Choose Bruno if:

• You must keep all API collections and traffic fully local (e.g., due to PCI, internal policies, or regulated data) and distrust cloud‑synced tools. (docs.usebruno.com)
• You want API collections to live inside Git repos and code review, using the same workflows as the rest of your stack. (github.com)
• Your team is comfortable with slightly less polish and some missing edge features in exchange for privacy, speed, and open source. (g2.com)
• You like the idea of paying once (Golden Edition) for extra features instead of stacking per‑seat SaaS bills—and you’re okay tracking Bruno’s evolving pricing model. (usebruno.cz)

If you’re unsure, a pragmatic pattern many teams follow in 2025:

• Start small with Bruno or Hoppscotch for local developer workflows (especially if privacy is a concern).
• Add Insomnia or Postman when you need organization‑wide collaboration, governance, or a formal API catalog.
• Re‑evaluate yearly as your team size, risk profile, and API footprint change.

Sources & links

Company websites

• postman.com
• insomnia.rest
• hoppscotch.com
• usebruno.cz

Pricing pages

• postman.com
• postman.com
• insomnia.rest
• hoppscotch.com
• usebruno.cz

Documentation

• learning.postman.com
• insomnia.rest
• docs.hoppscotch.io
• docs.usebruno.com
• github.com

G2 review pages

• g2.com
• g2.com
• g2.com
• g2.com

Reddit discussions

• reddit.com
• reddit.com
• reddit.com
• reddit.com

Additional resources

• speedscale.com
• prnewswire.com
• blog.usebruno.com
• docs.hoppscotch.io