Postman vs REST Assured for API test automation?

Depends on **who else runs the tests** and **what "API test" means for you**. **Pick Postman/Newman if:** - Non-engineers (PMs, support, junior QA) need to trigger or read tests. - You already publish collections as API docs (Postman doubles as documentation). - Most tests are single-request + JSON schema checks. - You want minimal setup: import collection, hit run. **Pick REST Assured if:** - Your team is Java/Kotlin dominant and wants tests to live next to service code. - You need complex flows (chained auth, DB verification between requests, custom serializers). - You want the same reporting/CI stack as your Selenium/Playwright suite (Maven, Allure, TestNG). - You care about type safety and refactorability. **My honest take for a mixed 6-person team:** neither, actually. Consolidate on **one of the code-first frameworks in the language your product is written in**: - Node/TS product → `supertest` or `pactum` - Java/Kotlin product → REST Assured - Python product → `httpx` + `pytest` Reasoning: API tests belong next to the API, in the same repo, in the same language, versioned with the code. Postman is fantastic for **exploration and docs**. It's a poor primary automation framework once you have >200 tests, dynamic auth, and multi-service orchestration — the .pm.json files become unreviewable in code review. **Migration path if you go REST Assured:** 1. Export Postman collections to OpenAPI, then generate REST Assured stubs from OpenAPI. 2. Keep Postman for exploratory/manual and as living docs. 3. All CI-gating tests move to REST Assured with Allure reporting. Reporting parity across the team was worth the 3-week port for us.