Best API Testing Tools in 2025: Postman vs Insomnia vs Bruno Compared

A 2024 Postman survey of more than 40,000 developers found that API work now consumes roughly half of a typical engineering week. That number explains why the choice of an API client matters more than it used to. Ten years ago, these tools were thin wrappers around HTTP requests. Today they store your test suites, generate documentation, run CI pipelines, and in some cases sync everything to a cloud account you may not fully control.

Three tools dominate the conversation in 2025: Postman, the incumbent; Insomnia, the design-focused challenger; and Bruno, the open-source newcomer built around local-first storage. They overlap heavily in features, but they make very different trade-offs. Here’s how they compare on the things that actually affect daily work.

The Contenders at a Glance

Postman launched in 2012 and grew into a full API platform. It covers request building, automated testing, mock servers, documentation hosting, and team collaboration. The free tier is generous, but many team features sit behind paid plans.

Insomnia started in 2016 as a cleaner alternative to Postman and was acquired by Kong in 2019. It emphasizes a polished interface, support for REST, GraphQL, gRPC, and WebSockets, and a design-first workflow that pairs well with Kong’s API gateway products.

Bruno appeared in 2022 as a reaction to cloud-first tooling. Collections are stored as plain-text files (a custom .bru format) on your local filesystem, and you can commit them to Git like any other source file. No account is required to use it.

Pricing and Licensing

This is where the three diverge most sharply.

Postman’s free plan covers individual use, but collaboration features, advanced mock servers, and higher API call limits require paid tiers. Team plans run around $14–$19 per user per month when billed annually, and enterprise pricing is custom. In 2023, Postman discontinued its Scratch Pad and pushed users toward cloud-synced workspaces, which frustrated developers who wanted purely local workflows.

Insomnia’s free tier is usable, but the paid Individual plan costs about $8 per month, and team plans start around $16 per user per month. After Kong’s acquisition, some longtime users complained that features once free moved behind the paywall, and the account requirement became harder to avoid.

Bruno is free and open source (MIT licensed). A paid “Golden Edition” exists for teams that want a hosted collaboration layer, but the core app works entirely offline with no account. For solo developers and small teams, that’s a meaningful difference in both cost and friction.

Local-First vs Cloud-First Storage

Bruno’s defining feature is that your collections live as files on disk. You can open them in any text editor, diff them in a pull request, and resolve merge conflicts with standard Git tooling. For teams that already treat infrastructure as code, this fits naturally. There’s no vendor lock-in and no risk of losing access to your test suites if a company changes its terms.

Postman stores collections in its cloud by default, though you can export them as JSON. Collaboration happens through shared workspaces, which is convenient but means your API definitions live on Postman’s servers. Insomnia offers both local and cloud storage, but its cloud sync is tied to a Kong account.

The trade-off is real: cloud-first tools handle real-time collaboration better out of the box. If five people need to edit the same collection simultaneously, Postman’s model is smoother. If you’d rather review API changes in a Git diff, Bruno wins.

Testing and Automation

All three support scripting for pre-request and post-response logic, environment variables, and collection runners.

Postman uses JavaScript with a rich pm API and has the most mature CI story through Newman, its command-line runner. If your team already has Postman collections, wiring them into GitHub Actions or Jenkins is well-documented and battle-tested.

Insomnia supports scripting and has a CLI runner, but its automation ecosystem is smaller. It shines more in interactive design work than in large-scale test orchestration.

Bruno added a CLI (bru) for running collections in CI, and its scripting uses a JavaScript-like syntax. It’s younger, so you’ll find fewer Stack Overflow answers when something breaks, but the basics work well. For teams that want test definitions versioned alongside application code, Bruno’s file-based approach is a genuine advantage.

GraphQL, gRPC, and Protocol Support

Postman supports REST, GraphQL, gRPC, WebSockets, and SOAP, with strong GraphQL tooling including schema introspection and query autocomplete.

Insomnia also covers REST, GraphQL, gRPC, and WebSockets, and its GraphQL editor is arguably the most pleasant of the three for exploratory work. If your stack leans heavily on GraphQL, Insomnia deserves a serious look.

Bruno supports REST, GraphQL, and gRPC. Coverage is solid for mainstream use, though its gRPC tooling is less mature than Postman’s.

User Experience and Performance

Postman has grown heavy over the years. The desktop app is built on Electron, and many users report it feeling sluggish as workspaces accumulate. Its feature depth is also its weakness: the interface can overwhelm newcomers.

Insomnia feels lighter and more focused. The layout is clean, and keyboard-driven workflows are smooth. It’s the tool many developers reach for when they want to send a request quickly without navigating a platform.

Bruno is the fastest and lightest of the three. It’s also the least feature-complete, which is a deliberate trade-off. If you mostly send REST requests and keep collections in Git, the lean interface is a feature, not a limitation.

Which Should You Choose?

There’s no universal winner, but the decision usually comes down to team structure and priorities.

Choose Postman if you need the broadest feature set, mature CI integration through Newman, and real-time collaboration across a large team. It’s the safest default for enterprises with existing Postman investments.

Choose Insomnia if you work heavily with GraphQL or gRPC, value a clean interface, and don’t mind the Kong account requirement. It’s a strong middle ground between power and polish.

Choose Bruno if you want local-first storage, Git-friendly collections, no account requirement, and zero licensing cost. It’s the best fit for small teams, open-source projects, and developers who distrust cloud lock-in.

Many developers run two of these side by side. A common pattern in 2025 is Bruno for day-to-day work and version-controlled test suites, with Postman reserved for team collaboration or client-facing documentation.

The Bottom Line

The API client market has finally split along a clear axis: cloud convenience versus local control. Postman bet on the former and built a platform. Bruno bet on the latter and built a tool that behaves like source code. Insomnia sits in between, leaning toward design and polish.

Before committing, spend an afternoon with each. Import an existing collection, run a test suite, and try collaborating with a teammate. The tool that fits your workflow will make itself obvious faster than any feature comparison can.