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
21st
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
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
68
Ranking in other categories
API Testing Tools (11th), Test Automation Tools (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Galen Framework is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Worksoft Certify is 5.2%, up from 5.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Worksoft Certify5.2%
Galen Framework0.3%
Other94.5%
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.
Venkata Manikanta Somala - PeerSpot reviewer
Best tool for SAP Environment & Powerfull Automation tool with user friendly interface
From my experience, Worksoft Certify is a good tool for automating SAP, and it also works fine with web apps. But while creating or running scripts, we do face some automation abort issues, which break the flow and need rework. Also, sometimes it feels a bit slow, especially when running more scripts together. If the speed and stability can be improved, that would really help. We are using CTM for scheduling and managing runs it’s useful, but there’s still some scope to improve things like live monitoring and checking results more easily.

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."
"One of the bigger value-adds that we had was extracting data from our warning systems to be inputted into our new learning system."
"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."
"It provides a lot of time savings. We are always ready to execute a task whenever the business asks us. We saved approximately 7000 hours in 2018."
"We are able to automate, not just SAP, but the entire application ecosystem. If you take any company, SAP is the backbone, and if they use SAP ERP, then, there are multiple software applications, where some of them are SAP and some of them are non-SAP applications. Worksoft is one of the tools which can transcend across SAP and non-SAP applications. Non-SAP application include Java or .NET. Worksoft can seamlessly automate these applications."
"It's pretty seamless with SAP and Salesforce because they've built in the field definitions and all the things that you need. You literally turn it on and execute your script and it records it. It's very simple. Then you can go back and put in some of the other functions. For example, instead of hard-coding field selections, you put in a data table so you can run it multiple times or with multiple data. It was actually written to work very well with SAP."
"It is a pretty easy tool to use as far as automated testing tools go."
"It is very easy to maintain. With scripts, I can change one line and in one step. Whatever I want, I can do. I don't need to be an expert to use it."
"The solution has cut our clients' test maintenance time for changes, like patches or system upgrades. They used to take a lot of time until the production validation completed. Now, it is just seconds until it is ready, so they can do executions within couple of minutes."
 

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."
"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."
"An area that I would like to see improved is how the permissions are applied. If you're applying permissions groups to a user, one of the options is to delete the group entirely and lose the entire permission group, rather than just deleting the permission from the user, which seems a little silly. In my opinion, that whole module of permissions is very confusing and lends itself to common errors."
"There was a change to Capture 2.0. In the end, there have been some challenges with the newer version. Therefore, the company testers, the local ones, do not want to use Capture 2.0."
"For Execution Manager, I would like it to be more robust interface and be able to view the remote machines full screen instead of a little window."
"The overall speed and performance of this solution could be improved. In a future release, it would be useful to be able to do API testing."
"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."
"With one of our applications where we do check-in, Worksoft is not able to identify the Java-based application. We raised the ticket, but we were unable to resolve this using Worksoft."
"I would like to see the impact analysis integrated with the performance testing tool. We have multiple tools doing multiple items. I would like to have one common tool."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"We no longer need ten people sitting and manually testing something. We can just have one person running the entire regression automation testing suite, and this has saved us dollars."
"We have an annual license for this solution. The product is very expensive."
"It is expensive compared to some of the other automation tools in the market. However, the benefits and ROI has proved that it has been a good investment."
"This solution is expensive."
"It is costly. It is a bit more expensive than Tricentis Tosca and other tools. If they reduce its price going forward and have partnerships with other vendors, it will grow like anything."
"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."
"The typical range that we see is between 50 to 90 percent improvement in speed capabilities. Another aspect comes with the depth that they're able to test. It increases their capabilities overall to test at a broader level."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
869,513 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
17%
Retailer
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise58
 

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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Worksoft Certify?
Yeah, the setup and license cost is a bit high as per I known but if you’re working mostly on SAP, it’s worth it definitely. You just need to plan based on your project and how much you’ll use it.
 

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: September 2025.
869,513 professionals have used our research since 2012.