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

Galen Framework vs Worksoft Certify 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
22nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Worksoft Certify
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (9th), Test Automation Tools (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Galen Framework is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Worksoft Certify is 5.2%, up from 4.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HH
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.
Shailesh-Parkhe - PeerSpot reviewer
Powerful automation tool with a user-friendly interface, codeless automation, and adaptability to complex business processes, particularly in SAP environments
The tool itself is highly effective, especially when it comes to comprehensibility for newcomers. Even during the initial learning phase, I found it remarkably user-friendly. It facilitates quick onboarding and training of new resources. It offers features for building automation scripts, such as search and certify capture. A notable advantage is that it doesn't rely on other tools like Micro Focus UFT or Micro Focus ALM for script execution. Worksoft can run independently without the need for support from Microsoft Office, although the option to use it for maintaining data exists. The tool also includes debugging features and comprehensive reporting capabilities, generating PDF reports for easy analysis.

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."
"Our business users are doing regression testing as their day job. This is an add-on to their daily work. With everything so pressured in the industry, automation takes the pressure of these users."
"With Worksoft, we have been able to automate six of our smoke tests in four months."
"One big advantage of Worksoft Certify is its integration with SAP Solution Manager..."
"It is a huge improvement, as it recognizes complex general applications, where most tools won't recognize the objects within them."
"The ability to work with the data, with recordsets, and plug those into the scripts is very easy and very powerful. We use it extensively."
"We are now trying to automate all our applications: SAP, web, third-party, and legacy. Instead of multiple tools, we have been able to have Worksoft handle a lot of our applications. This has saved us a lot of time and effort."
"The Capture 2.0 feature is very intuitive, useful, and user-friendly. You can do so much with it now, versus the older version."
"Worksoft Certify Mostly is an easy-to-learn tool and does not require any extensive training."
 

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."
"Our interactions with technical support has not been the best always and there is room for improvement especially with respect to the time taken to respond to cases. However, with the right contacts and reasonable escalations we have always managed to get quick attention on our cases."
"Worksoft Certify's tech support's response time could be improved."
"We can use it for the web application, but we are facing stability-related challenges. The properties are getting changed. For example, when I am performing any operation on the text box but the development team has done some changes, our Worksoft scripts are getting changed. This is the main challenge that we are facing while developing tests for the web application in Worksoft Certify, where any changes in the backend are indirectly impacting our scripts. For the web application, there is a scarcity of resources. Unlike an SAP application that doesn't require much experience, for the web application, you require experienced people."
"We can't get the process intelligence module to work properly. We can't get the impact comment that analyzes the incoming development code to run, either. We've also had bugs in the CTM and execution manager in the past year. It took technical support a long time to resolve this issue. We escalated it so that the vice president of the company was included as well."
"We would like this to be able to be used outside of SAP applications, as it would be good for other types of products."
"The definitions for the objects need to be automated. They need to be recognized automatically by Worksoft Certify instead of changing them back and forth manually. This is also something that Worksoft is currently working on."
"When it comes to mobile testing, we have a small bottleneck there. You have to buy third-party separate licenses if you want to test on a mobile. Business wise we see room for improvement there, although it's that really critical for us."
"The technical support of the product is an area of concern where certain improvements are required."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Worksoft Capture 2.0 can help our customers to accelerate their automation development at least 40 percent faster than any other commercial tools available in the market."
"Purchasing and licensing are okay. Go for the perpetual licenses. In that way, you own a license, then you can purchase maintenance and support on top of that, so you don't have to pay every year for it. Even if you don't want it a contract with Worksoft Certify in the future, you will have your own license of it. Then, if your usage is not that much, you can have one or two perpetual licenses. However, if you want to run your processes, you will need more licenses, e.g., using the run-only licenses. They are really cheap compared to the full licensing."
"I can only judge based on the situation that we had around six years ago when we did the tool evaluation. Worksoft was not the cheapest, but it provided the value. For 25 concurrent licenses, we paid more than €400,000, so it was not cheap. In the end, if you see how much time you are saving and compare it with others, its price is okay. We had also compared its cost with the licensing costs for HP and Tricentis, and they were at another level. Now, as we have already booked the licenses, we only have to pay an annual maintenance fee, which is 70%, and that is okay."
"In general, they changed their license model. Before you had to buy licenses for each component, and now they changed it so you can buy a license and use it for nearly all their applications."
"Automating our manual processes has saved us 70 to 80 percent in time."
"The initial upfront cost in terms of licenses, plus all the money that we spent developing tests, has proven it's worth. Now, we can do a regression test suite in ten days as opposed to sixteen weeks."
"On our last big SAP implementation project, we inserted an automation resource into the beginning of the project. Between automating regression processes, data staging, and using our automation to help repair cutover and conversion issues. We saved the project about $1,700,000."
"We save probably 50 percent of our time. The tool does what it's supposed to do, and we are able to actually work."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
19%
Retailer
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Galen Framework?
What I like most about Galen Framework are its advantages, particularly its spec language and the spec file feature.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Galen Framework?
Galen Framework does not have any additional costs after the product is purchased.
What needs improvement with Galen Framework?
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 exis...
How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?
Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...
What do you like most about Worksoft Certify?
A specific feature that I found to be the most valuable in the solution for our company's work processes stems from the fact that it is useful as a low-code automation tool.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Kraft, Reliant Energy, Richemont, Applied Materials, Siemens PLM, Mosaic, Dow Corning, ebay, IBM, Accenture, Fortis BC, US Government, Southwest Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about Galen Framework vs. Worksoft Certify and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.