Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Galen Framework vs Oracle Application Testing Suite comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
34th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Oracle Application Testing ...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
23rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (15th), Load Testing Tools (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Galen Framework is 0.8%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.6%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Oracle Application Testing Suite1.6%
Galen Framework0.8%
Other97.6%
Functional Testing 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.
Rishabh-Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer at Cignity Technology
Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy
Oracle Application Testing Suite can improve by covering more browsers as compared to other solutions because they're considering the Edge browser as well, but the solution is working on different Windows operating platforms. For example, in our current Windows 2012 R2 server, if I want to automate the Edge browser, I need to upgrade that particular Windows to Windows 10.1 or some other Windows platform, because it's not supported in Windows 2012 feature. That is an issue. If cross-browsers can be incorporated, then support should be provided. There should be a single operating system where everything can be incorporated. I have faced issues with some indexing items. For example, the solution is able to derive some properties from the screen, such as button locations or text locations, but there are some elements, for example, unnamed buttons or text, where there is no name or ID or any other identifying information. Indexing doesn't always work, and we have to go to those elements manually and inspect them to determine their class, and then input that information into the system.

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."
"The solution is scalable."
"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"The function test feature is valuable."
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."
"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."
 

Cons

"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."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."
"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."
"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."
"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."
"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Government
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Performing Arts
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
 

Also Known As

No data available
OATS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries
Find out what your peers are saying about Galen Framework vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.