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

CrossBrowserTesting vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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

CrossBrowserTesting
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
16th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 1.4%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 2.0%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web2.0%
CrossBrowserTesting1.4%
Other96.6%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

CN
Senior DevOps Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Knowledgeable support, scalable, and stable
We use CrossBrowserTesting for testing our web-based applications We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve. I have used CrossBrowserTesting within the past 12 months. CrossBrowserTesting is stable. I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable.…
reviewer2356440 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Experienced ease in automation with strong support while seeking improvements in low-code options
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web offers flexibility of deployment, from on-premises to UFT One which is on the cloud. They provide capability for immediate deployment, and assets can be migrated easily. They include enablers specifically for quick migration of test assets. While I have not personally been involved in these migrations, I have observed some clients using it directly while others make a complete shift from OpenText to Tricentis platforms. There have not been many clients moving from OpenText platforms from on-premises to cloud because most shifts have been toward different product categories such as Tricentis altogether.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"CrossBrowserTesting improved my organization because it eliminates the need for a physical device with a tester to cover our used browsers."
"The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues."
"Each new session started with the live testing feature allows for a cleared browser and new experience to be able to not only see these attributes on the page clearly but also pass clean data."
"With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"At the moment, all our deploys depend on results of automation. If the tests are failing, then we know that something is wrong at the early stages of development."
"I must acknowledge that the customer support has been A++ when I have run into problems."
"The features that I find most useful and the ones that I use the most are local site testing, device and browser testing, and screenshots."
"The fact that it allows users to test on real mobile devices instead of emulators is something that projects have told us is beyond compare."
"The ease of use and being able to enroll more people into developing test scripts using their AI function, which they call AI but is OCR recognition, is significant."
"The main benefit is that you can get a very quick idea regarding the performance of your application, and it also helps you discover hidden pain points that you would not have found without using this tool."
"This helped my prior organization immensely due to the ability to remotely manipulate devices, even by offshore vendors."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."
"The pricing is great."
"The ideas and possibilities that this tool has are incredibly useful."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
 

Cons

"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."
"The speed to connect to mobile devices needs improvement, and sometimes the connection fails."
"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"Deployment was an issue. Each time we set it up and deployed, it failed and we had to relaunch it again."
"However, it is still a young product that is improving leaps and bounds each release."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."
"With versions prior to 2.0 I found that configuration was trickier than it should be, particularly with aspects such as NV."
"However, in some cases we discovered some issues for HPE support regarding the latest enhancements; the delivery time for these enhancements is not as fast as we would like."
"We need to scale devices easily. Some customers would like to loop in AWS or other cloud providers to check if their devices have the cloud factor. OpenText UFT Digital Lab needs to improve it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."
"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."
"While the pricing may seem relatively high, when compared to competitors, it often falls in line or can even be more cost-effective."
"The product could be more affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Performing Arts
6%
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Non Profit
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
Digital Lab is a pretty solid product with areas that could be continuously improved on.
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
I deal with OpenText Analysis Database and Core Performance Engineering, which are categories of software rather than individual pieces. We focus on the ADM area, which includes ALM, UFT One, UFT D...
What advice do you have for others considering Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
I do have experience with OpenText products and OpenText ALM. I have been using ALM Quality Center, which has had a few names for it over time, but it is the old Quality Center that was then rename...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.