IBM DevOps Test UI vs Qt Squish comparison

IBM and Qt Group are both solutions in the Regression Testing Tools category. Additionally, 88% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Qt Group users who would recommend it.

IBM DevOps Test UI

Read 8 IBM DevOps Test UI reviews

819 Views
450 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Qt Squish

Read 20 Qt Squish reviews

3,047 Views
2,468 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

IBM DevOps Test UI

Qt Squish

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM DevOps Test UI and Qt Squish based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Regression Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Qt Squish Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Qt Squish

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 peers since 2012

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

IBM DevOps Test UI

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (26th), Regression Testing Tools (13th)

Qt Squish

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Automation Tools (11th)

Featured Reviews

Hellen Zhang

Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada

Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support

The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework. The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run. The reason is that changes were made to how it works with the browser and the startup takes some time. Adjusting those changes to speed up the load time will improve the solution.

Read full review

Luc Vangrunderbeeck

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."

"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."

"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."

"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."

"froglogic Squish is one of the most desired solutions if you are having a Qt as a framework and if you are looking at GUI regression testing. froglogic is a part of Qt as a company."

"This product can work with QT applications and cross-cut from them on Windows or Mac."

"It is very stable."

"The initial setup process is straightforward."

"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."

"Squish is integrated with Qt, which enables us to test the user interface effectively."

"I find it very user-friendly and easy to start working with. The main benefit for me is that it allows testing applications developed in the Qt language. This capability makes Squish a game-changer, as it's the only tool I've found that enables automation for applications written in Qt. I appreciate three main aspects. Firstly, the documentation is excellent. Secondly, I value the way the tool efficiently locates elements during testing. These are the two aspects I particularly like."

"I can perform Java SWT."

Cons

"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."

"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."

"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."

"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."

"The price could be better."

"I'm relatively new to Squish, so I'm not familiar with all its pros and cons. Currently, I haven't identified any specific improvements. However, one feature I miss is Git integration within the tool. In my previous experience with Selenium and Python in PyCharm, it was straightforward to create and review changes before pushing them. I haven't found a similar option in Squish, and having an integrated tool for managing conflicts would be beneficial in certain scenarios where collaboration is involved."

"Support isn't always helpful. I sometimes need to find solutions myself."

"There had been a lot of improvements with froglogic Squish already. There were some scenarios in which this particular solution was available in different flavors. They have pulled everything together in one solution. There were some monitoring systems, which were missing out from the solution earlier. They have a centralized dashboard for monitoring the test cases and their execution. It's a full-blown solution, there are not many glitches in terms of something missing out of the package."

"You need to set up some special environment variables."

"We encountered issues with the embedded environment and building for the Qt version."

"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."

"ID could be improved with suggestions of names, variables or class."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."

"It is expensive."

"The platform is highly-priced."

"The price could be better. I believe each developer license costs about 6000 or 7000 Euros per year."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

21%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Outsourcing Company

Government

Manufacturing Company

22%

Computer Software Company

12%

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	1
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	9

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with froglogic Squish?

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Functional Testing vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 13% of the time

Katalon Studio vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 13% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 12% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 10% of the time

Selenium HQ vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 9% of the time

More IBM DevOps Test UI Competitors

Ranorex Studio vs Qt Squish

Compared 15% of the time

Eggplant Test vs Qt Squish

Compared 15% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Qt Squish

Compared 9% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Qt Squish

Compared 9% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Qt Squish

Compared 7% of the time

More Qt Squish Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

December 2025

Download IBM DevOps Test UI product report

Buyer's Guide

Qt Squish

January 2026

Download Qt Squish product report

Also Known As

IBM Rational Functional Tester

froglogic Squish

Overview

IBM DevOps Test UI, also known as Rational Functional Tester, is a software tool designed for automated functional and regression testing of Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) and data-driven testing. It automates the testing process to ensure application functionalities work as intended and identifies any issues caused by new code changes. The tool is tailored for GUI testing, allowing for easy recording and playback of test cases that interact with UI elements like buttons and menus. It supports data-driven testing, enabling comprehensive tests across various data sets. Additionally, it offers visual editing features with screenshot representations for easy test creation and ScriptAssure technology to maintain test scripts even if the UI changes.

IBM

Take the complexity out of testing graphical user interfaces (GUIs) and human-machine interfaces (HMIs) – even in the face of product evolution and safety-critical applications.

Qt Group

Sample Customers

Edumate

Google, Nokia, Pfizer, Siemens, Synopsys, Airbus, Boeing, Mercedes Benz, Disney, Shell, Reuters, Vodafone, XILINX, GE, Ericsson

Buyer's Guide

IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Qt Squish

December 2025

Free Report: IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Qt Squish

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Qt Squish and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Qt Squish report.

See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Regression Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.