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

Galen Framework vs UiPath Test Cloud 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
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
31st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
UiPath Test Cloud
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (4th), Mobile App Testing Tools (4th), API Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Galen Framework is 1.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of UiPath Test Cloud is 2.0%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
UiPath Test Cloud2.0%
Galen Framework1.5%
Other96.5%
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.
SK
Senior Solutions Architect at a outsourcing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Integrates well and supports end-to-end workflows with API integration
I deal with various tools including UiPath Test Cloud, Sauce Labs, Postman, and the latest feature, Copilot, so I use everything. A lot of tools are involved. There is a significant difference between Sauce Labs and UiPath Test Cloud; while Sauce Labs offers automation capabilities, the differentiating factor is test coverage. UiPath Test Cloud hits a higher percentage of test cases per lines of code, which means it may cover 7,000 lines in automated tests from 10,000, as opposed to 3,000-4,000 lines with Sauce Labs in a similar scenario. Sauce Labs is less expensive than some of the other tools, and while UiPath Test Cloud has become much better and easier to use than in the past, Sauce Labs was initially user-friendly, but now UiPath Test Cloud has improved significantly from its earlier, more complicated interface.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"In the market, not so many tools are able to check the layout with different screen resolutions as Galen can."
"What I like most about Galen Framework are its advantages, particularly its spec language and the spec file feature."
"Being able to use regular expressions, activities, and attributes is valuable."
"The most valuable feature of UiPath Test Cloud that I have found is the TestManager dashboard, which integrates with Jira through Planview Tasktop. This allows us to create different suites in TestManager, schedule them, and integrate them with CI/CD."
"It is feature-rich. It has more features than other RPA tools."
"UiPath's most valuable features are reusability and low-code aspects. It works across both desktop and web applications."
"The console, in a single pane, allows us to understand where we are in the testing environment."
"The document understanding is good."
"Test Manager is helpful for tracking process steps. We can see which step is failing."
"We are finding bugs and defects much faster."
 

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."
"At FORWARD VI, we see new automations being built around AI and the ability to have developers understand how they can drive some of those AI capabilities with Studio. We are starting to see that. They should also drive that with UiPath Test Suite so that we can not only build that development side faster; we can also develop the tests that go along with it, hopefully automatically."
"The initial setup of UiPath Test Cloud is a mixed bag; while setting up the tool is easy, building the tests is always tedious."
"UiPath could further enhance its functionality by simplifying the test case creation process within Test Suite."
"I'd like the solution to be even more automated."
"Accessing the full functionality of the Test Suite manager, including the dashboard, requires a tenant license."
"With Selenium, there is a plugin called Healenium, which helps automatically detect changed properties of objects. With one click, it automatically updates the object repository with the changed properties. I would like UiPath to add that capability."
"They could improve the visualization of the product."
"There is room for improvement in terms of introducing framework compatibility."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Regarding the pricing model, I believe it would be beneficial to combine it with some of the other platform aspects."
"UiPath Test Suite is a cost-effective solution. Orchestrator is the most expensive UiPath module, costing around $20,000, but you don't need to purchase Orchestrator to use Test Suite. You can buy a nonproductive version that costs about $2,400. It's a better value than other products I've seen."
"I wasn't involved in the negotiations for the UiPath Test Suite, so I have no information on its pricing."
"I am not aware of the exact cost. It seems reasonable, but it is an additional cost."
"I don't necessarily have a problem with the pricing of the UiPath Test Suite, especially because we're using the testing bot licenses as opposed to the unattended licensing."
"It is a little bit more expensive than Selenium, but it provides value for money. There are multiple types of licenses such as the Test Suite license, Studio Pro license, Test Manager license, and Test Robot license. The overall cost estimation is 13,800 dollars."
"Its price is a bit high."
"When we decided to buy the solution three and a half years ago, it was fairly priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
914,322 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for UiPath Test Suite?
I consider it expensive. I would rate it a seven out of ten for pricing. It's priced per license on an annual basis. Our customers usually pay around 30K to 35K for five licenses, which is priced p...
What needs improvement with UiPath Test Suite?
The speed could be improved. I've noticed that adding more users impacts the speed, although nothing stops entirely. The speed for each transaction might be slower, but I cannot pinpoint exactly wh...
What is your primary use case for UiPath Test Suite?
My use case for this product is specific to a high-profile project within the life sciences domain, where I am involved in the transportation of critical emergency medications that get prescribed a...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Test Suite
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Galen Framework vs. UiPath Test Cloud and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
914,322 professionals have used our research since 2012.