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

IBM DevOps Test UI vs Testim comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
25th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (12th)
Testim
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 1.6%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Testim is 1.9%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Testim1.9%
IBM DevOps Test UI1.6%
Other96.5%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
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.
JM
Director - Quality Engineering at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Smart locators and small learning curve streamline test automation, minimizing maintenance and boosting efficiency.
Testim has a specific feature called a smart locator. Anyone experienced in test automation knows this is one of the most complex parts of developing automated scripts. The Testim feature automatically finds the locators, which helps us build stable test scripts. Stable scripts are crucial for receiving faster and more reliable feedback. I have also seen reduced maintenance due to smart locators, as it automatically finds locators for us even with minor application changes.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"By automating regression test suites using this product, we were able to show time savings of more than 1200 hours in less than ONE year."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"Robust API provides quick turnaround for developers to understand and automate functional test case quickly."
"As it is built on Ellipse/Java and costs less than other tools, it is recommended."
"The technical support is good; at least their response time is good, and whenever we ask them for help regarding deployment customizations, custom code implementation, or other code needs, they heavily support us, assign us IT engineers who work alongside us helping with code-related issues, and stay until the problem is resolved."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"It helps in automation by using better object recognition as compared to other tools in the market."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester, which analyzes the changes in UI elements and allows me to automatically adapt and change my automation testing."
"It enabled us to cover our app in end-to-end tests very quickly with quality results."
"It is a highly stable solution."
"We added Testim to our CI flow. It allows us to test only tasks that already passed sanity tests."
"I have seen reduced maintenance due to smart locators, as it automatically finds locators for us even with minor application changes."
"The automating smoke and regression tests have become easier and handier and manual efforts are saved."
"The product is easy to use."
"We primarily use the solution for business E2E testing, as it is fast and reliable, easy to maintain, and allows for the involvement of QA as well as Dev and BA."
"Testim introduces three services covering validation steps, eliminating the necessity to write complex code."
 

Cons

"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."
"It does not fully justify being a paid tool, and it needs improvement."
"If in the future there is no support for mobile applications, then we will be using it less."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"With version 8.5 we faced workspace crash issues frequently."
"The object repository used for identifying objects can be made better. It has been noticed that the RFT tool is unable to identify some objects, due to which we are unable to add them to the object repository."
"If you look at today's current context, I wouldn't recommend RFT because there are far more advanced solutions and products available."
"The product's areas of improvement include pricing considerations and additional features related to visual testing and PDF handling."
"The UI could use a better design with a better user experience in mind."
"The accessibility reporting features could be more robust to be reported at the script level and allow users to map down to the step level."
"In the last couple of months, I have experienced some downtime where it wasn't working."
"I get a little bit confused while creating new branches."
"Testim sometimes fails due to stability issues. It doesn't always work consistently, especially after running multiple tests."
"The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved."
"There are common properties between multiple elements that we should be able to edit - such as 'when this step fails,' 'when to run this step,' and 'override timeout'. I should be able to update these properties if I select multiple elements."
 

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."
"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten compared to other tools."
"The tool offers a fixed pricing model for our company."
"The solution is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
8%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Testim?
More advanced AI-based features and features on the API side would help us create better end-to-end test suites.
What is your primary use case for Testim?
As a Quality Engineering leader, I'm responsible for testing our 20-25 applications. Manual testing is becoming increasingly challenging due to their growing scope and complexity. We've been automa...
What advice do you have for others considering Testim?
Before diving into this tool, it's highly recommended to have a basic understanding of Selenium and JavaScript. The company provides excellent training courses for free, and I strongly suggest comp...
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Functional Tester
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edumate
Microsoft, salesforce, JFrog, USA Today, Globality
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Testim and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.