Comparison

APIAssert vs Postman Monitors

APIAssert vs Postman Monitors

Postman is the leading API development platform. Its Monitors feature lets you run collections on a schedule. Here's how Postman Monitors compares to APIAssert for ongoing API monitoring.

Overview

Feature APIAssert Postman Monitors
Primary Use Continuous API monitoring Scheduled collection runs
Setup Point-and-click Requires Postman collection
GraphQL First-class support Via HTTP requests
Check Intervals 30 seconds minimum 5 minutes minimum
Alerting Slack, PagerDuty, etc. Email, Slack, PagerDuty
Pricing Per monitor Per run (complex)

When to Choose APIAssert

Choose APIAssert if you need:

  • Fast check intervals — as low as 30 seconds
  • Simple setup — no collections to manage
  • Multi-region monitoring — 6 regions out of the box
  • Predictable pricing — per monitor, not per run
  • Purpose-built monitoring — it's all APIAssert does

APIAssert is designed from the ground up for continuous API monitoring. You don't need to maintain collections or understand Postman's ecosystem.

When to Choose Postman Monitors

Choose Postman Monitors if you:

  • Already use Postman — your collections are ready
  • Need complex test flows — multi-step, dependent requests
  • Want one platform — API development + testing + monitoring
  • Have existing investments — team already in Postman

If your team lives in Postman and has well-maintained collections, Monitors is a natural extension.

Feature Comparison

Setup Experience

APIAssert:

  1. Enter your API URL
  2. Add headers/auth
  3. Configure assertions
  4. Set check interval
  5. Done ✅

Postman Monitors:

  1. Create/import collection
  2. Write test scripts (JavaScript)
  3. Configure environment
  4. Create monitor from collection
  5. Set schedule
  6. Done

Assertions

APIAssert:

Point-and-click assertion builder:

  • ✅ $.user.status equals "active"
  • ✅ $.items.length greater than 0
  • ✅ Response time less than 500ms
  • ✅ Status code equals 200

Postman:

// Requires JavaScript:
pm.test("Status is active", function () {
    var json = pm.response.json();
    pm.expect(json.user.status).to.eql("active");
});

pm.test("Items exist", function () {
    var json = pm.response.json();
    pm.expect(json.items.length).to.be.above(0);
});

Check Intervals

APIAssert:

  • 30 seconds (minimum)
  • 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 30, 60 minutes

Postman Monitors:

  • 5 minutes (minimum on free)
  • 1 minute (paid plans)
  • Hourly, daily, weekly options

Pricing Model

APIAssert:

Plan Price Monitors
Free $0/mo 3 monitors
Pro $9/mo 20 monitors
Team $29/mo 100 monitors

Unlimited checks per monitor

Postman:

Plan Price Monitor Runs
Free $0/mo 1,000/mo
Basic $14/user/mo 10,000/mo
Professional $29/user/mo 25,000/mo

Note: Postman charges per run, which can add up quickly with frequent checks

Cost Example

Monitoring 10 APIs every minute:

APIAssert Pro ($9/mo):

  • 10 monitors included
  • Unlimited runs
  • Total: $9/mo

Postman:

  • 10 monitors × 1 min × 60 × 24 × 30 = 432,000 runs/mo
  • Requires Professional plan + additional run packs
  • Total: $29/user/mo + overage

Real-World Comparison

Scenario: Simple Health Check

Check if GET /api/health returns {"status": "ok"}:

APIAssert:

  1. Create monitor
  2. Enter URL
  3. Add assertion: $.status == "ok"
  4. Save

Postman:

  1. Create collection
  2. Add request
  3. Write test script:
    pm.test("Status is ok", function () {
        pm.expect(pm.response.json().status).to.eql("ok");
    });
    
  4. Create monitor from collection
  5. Configure schedule

Scenario: Multi-Step Flow

Test login → get user → update profile:

APIAssert: Create 3 separate monitors for each endpoint.

Postman: Create a collection with 3 requests that share variables. This is where Postman shines — complex, stateful workflows.

Key Differences

Philosophy

APIAssert: "Monitor your APIs continuously with minimal setup."

  • Focused on ongoing monitoring
  • Point-and-click configuration
  • Built for ops/SRE workflows

Postman Monitors: "Run your API tests on a schedule."

  • Extension of testing workflow
  • Code-based configuration
  • Built for developer testing

Best For

APIAssert:

  • Production API monitoring
  • Quick setup, minimal maintenance
  • Teams without Postman investment
  • Cost-sensitive monitoring needs

Postman:

  • API testing workflows
  • Complex multi-step scenarios
  • Teams already using Postman
  • Development-phase testing

Using Both

Many teams use both tools:

  • Postman during development for API testing and documentation
  • APIAssert in production for continuous monitoring

This gives you the best of both worlds:

  • Rich development experience in Postman
  • Purpose-built monitoring in APIAssert

Migration Path

If you're considering APIAssert after using Postman Monitors:

  1. Identify simple monitors that don't need multi-step flows
  2. Create them in APIAssert with point-and-click assertions
  3. Keep complex flows in Postman if needed
  4. Compare costs over a month

The Bottom Line

Postman Monitors is a natural choice if you're already invested in the Postman ecosystem and have well-maintained collections. It excels at scheduled testing of complex, multi-step API flows.

APIAssert is purpose-built for continuous monitoring. It's simpler to set up, has faster check intervals, and more predictable pricing. If you need straightforward API monitoring without managing collections, APIAssert is the better fit.

Try APIAssert free — no credit card required.