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

Galen Framework vs Qt Squish comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Galen Framework
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (31st)
Qt Squish
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Galen Framework is designed for Functional Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.6%, up 0.3% compared to last year.
Qt Squish, on the other hand, focuses on Test Automation Tools, holds 2.2% mindshare, down 3.4% since last year.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Galen Framework1.6%
Tricentis Tosca9.4%
OpenText Functional Testing8.5%
Other80.5%
Functional Testing Tools
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Qt Squish2.2%
Tricentis Tosca10.5%
OpenText Functional Testing8.2%
Other79.1%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HH
Senior Engineer at Bosch
Scalable with strong reporting capabilities
I haven't found any specific areas for modernization or improvement in Galen Framework yet. However, one observation I have made is about the auto-generation of Galen files. While this feature exists, functions don't seem to be available for automatically generating Galen values based on the specifications in the spec file, and this could be a potential improvement for Galen Framework.
Luc Vangrunderbeeck - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Test Engineer at Infrabel
Testing solution supports Java testing with good reliability
There is nothing you can do for almost every application. If you do it for a single version, it is rather easy. However, if you want to run it for different versions of the software, then you need the Qt version of Java. You need to set up some special environment variables to be able to do that.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"What I like most about Galen Framework are its advantages, particularly its spec language and the spec file feature."
"In the market, not so many tools are able to check the layout with different screen resolutions as Galen can."
"I can perform Java SWT."
"I like the dashboard. It's virtual, and you can see the customer results. I can do it at night and in the morning. I think it also automatically emails results."
"Stable automation suites; it is cheaper than most of other vendor automation tools, it supports a wide range of tool-kits, even embedded solutions, one tool for all your products."
"It is very stable."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"This product can work with QT applications and cross-cut from them, both on Windows OS and on Mac, as well as on mobile operating systems like iOS and Android too."
"Customer support was good; they work out of the box and are willing to add a new feature if we say and if it is feasible."
"Stable automation framework with its own object library enabled us to move all of the tests to a Continuous Integration farm."
 

Cons

"When I use @Test(dataProvider), it causes a loop; the test result/report cannot accept the value of the data and show it in the test result/report."
"There don't seem to be functions available for automatically generating Galen values based on the specifications in the spec file, and this could be a potential improvement for Galen Framework."
"ID could be improved with suggestions of names, variables or class."
"We have faced some difficulties in identifying canvas objects initially."
"Support isn't always helpful. I sometimes need to find solutions myself."
"The platform could be improved by implementing some basic functionalities that are frequently used, such as login procedures and screen handling when multiple screens are used at the workplace."
"The only criticism I have is the IDE needed a bit of polish in version 5.2 (this may have been fixed in the latest versions)."
"Anyhow, we can't automate the applications which are completely built on C/C++ without using Qt."
"I like it how it is, but it's not cheap."
"It still requires better solutions for object identification and an enhancement to identify all the objects of the AUT before building the object map."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The price could be better. I believe each developer license costs about 6000 or 7000 Euros per year."
"The platform is highly-priced."
"It is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
916,582 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
20%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise9
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for froglogic Squish?
I'm aware of the price from three or four years ago, and it depends on the number of users. For the developer license, it is about $5200 a year.
What needs improvement with froglogic Squish?
There is nothing you can do for almost every application. If you do it for a single version, it is rather easy. However, if you want to run it for different versions of the software, then you need ...
What is your primary use case for froglogic Squish?
I am not really using the solution during development, however, for regression and automatic regression tests, I am using it. I use it to do visual Qt, which focuses on the GUI part of the applicat...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
froglogic Squish
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Google, Nokia, Pfizer, Siemens, Synopsys, Airbus, Boeing, Mercedes Benz, Disney, Shell, Reuters, Vodafone, XILINX, GE, Ericsson
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, OpenText and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: October 2026.
916,582 professionals have used our research since 2012.