No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Appvance AIQ Platform vs Eggplant Test comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Appvance AIQ Platform
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
31st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (51st), Performance Testing Tools (17th), Functional Testing Tools (34th), Load Testing Tools (23rd), Regression Testing Tools (16th), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (7th)
Eggplant Test
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
11th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (10th), Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM) (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Appvance AIQ Platform is 1.2%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Eggplant Test is 3.3%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Eggplant Test3.3%
Appvance AIQ Platform1.2%
Other95.5%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

it_user129477 - PeerSpot reviewer
Performance Tester/QA at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Network Emulation allows for performance testing of geographically-distributed users.
It is a great performance testing tool. The most valuable feature of the tool is its Avatar technology. Scripting is really fast, compared to other tools. It works for almost all major protocols, platforms and browsers. It makes complex scenarios simple, and we need minimal custom coding. It also provides features for Network Emulation, which is quite helpful in testing the performance for geographically-distributed users. Appvance can provide information from end to end (back-end and front-end), which makes it surpass other tools. The tool provides protocol level as well as browser level response time. And it can be integrated with major monitoring tools. As it is a web-based tool, it makes it easy to access anywhere anytime. All the team members can access the common information easily.
Mirza Hussain - PeerSpot reviewer
Engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Has required frequent manual adjustments due to screen resolution but supports simple automation with minimal effort
I would prefer more UFT because it has VB scripting capabilities. While Eggplant Test also has this feature, it's not very user-friendly. I prefer the features of UFT compared to Eggplant Test. When needing to do quick automation, I would prefer Eggplant Test, but otherwise, I would always choose UFT. It depends on the complexity of the tasks. For big problems and complex automation tasks, I would prefer UFT because it has more flexibility and is more effective. With Eggplant Test, if you have very low complexity automation, such as simple click sequences and validation, then it would be preferable; with more complexity, I would not recommend Eggplant Test.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is a great performance testing tool."
"Prior to using the product, all regression testing was done manually for our POS system, and now regression test packs are 70% automated."
"The most valuable features would be the image recognition and the OCR."
"We took a two and a half week regression process and cut it down to almost two days of automation, which is pretty awesome and makes Eggplant probably one of the best tools on the market for GUI automation."
"It has enabled true end-to-end testing."
"These days I use only Eggplant since it is very easy to use, especially in the function test, and in the UI test, and it's better than other tools."
"Good text reading ability."
"The features that we like the most are the developer interface and the ability to quickly develop and deploy tests."
"The most valuable features of Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence are bug hunting and OCR technology."
 

Cons

"Reporting features can be improved to provide more flexibility, collation, exporting in different formats, etc."
"If one area could be improved, it would be some of their documentation. In particular, some of their online help and user support documentation is a little bit out of date and could be revised and updated on a more frequent basis. Other than that, I haven't really found any issues or problems."
"There was no free trial in it."
"Its performance and stability could be better."
"The reporting function is a bit shallow. The solution does not offer very comprehensive reporting in terms of your test results. The reporting time and the logs are very high level as well. These areas need improvement."
"The language is too specific; it is just for Eggplant."
"It has low productivity."
"The solution is very heavy, so sometimes my laptop, when I use it, stops and I have to link with it again."
"Eggplant Test is not a stable solution at all in my experience."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"This solution is expensive when compared to the market. However, the reason it is more expensive is because of its stability, high performance, and for its support of any technology."
"It is scalable, but it is a matter of money in the pocket. You can scale it, but then you have to have additional licenses. The licensing approach of eggPlant is not the best."
"Make a smart decision about the number of developer- and execution-only licenses you purchase to maximize your budget. We found that going heavier on execution-only licenses has been a way to reduce our costs and maximize our ability to benefit from the software."
"End-to-end testing isn't possible for us because of the licensing problems. It's very expensive, so we only have two development/execution licenses."
"Eggplant Test is a very expensive solution."
"It probably has a yearly license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
10%
Healthcare Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise14
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Eggplant Manager?
The price of Eggplant Test is on the higher side, but the benefits it provides make it worth using.
What needs improvement with Eggplant Manager?
I would prefer more UFT because it has VB scripting capabilities. While Eggplant Test also has this feature, it's not very user-friendly. I prefer the features of UFT compared to Eggplant Test. Whe...
 

Also Known As

Appvance
Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence, Eggplant DAI, Eggplant Automation Cloud, Eggplant Manager, Eggplant Mobile, Eggplant Customer Experience Insights
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, Bell Canada, CBS, UBC, PepsiCo, 7-11, BenefitVision, Kabbage, Catalent Pharmaceuticals, McKesson, Veritas, Cherwell, QAT Global, Sony, SiriusXM, CoPart, Auto Parts Alliance, PPD
FUJIFILM Group, NEC Personal Computers
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Katalon Studio, Worksoft and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: July 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.