IBM Rational Functional Tester vs Qualibrate comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Functional Tester and Qualibrate based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, SeleniumHQ, Micro Focus and others in Functional Testing Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: October 2022).
653,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."

More IBM Rational Functional Tester Pros →

"The widget's ease of use is the most valuable, which means it allows you or business people to record the automated test scripts. In most cases, it is really good because it is the business people who actually know how the system is being used. The simplicity of the design is valuable, where you can record your transactions, then create your automated scripts. You can automate it at the same time, and the automation features are cool.""It is the principle functionality that we're leveraging, which really can be defined as recordings and playbacks. So, you record the scripts that you want to execute and you also want to be able to playback. So, these are the features that we are largely leveraging. There are flows and scenarios, and they are the design aspects that fit within the playback and the recording solution. For me, they are the core of Qualibrate, and that's what we're using.""We use the solution’s Test Planning & test Execution Scheduling features, and they are very important. They are easy to work with. We use SAP Solution Manager, and Qualibrate works with it, enabling us to manage all our tests, taking them from Solution Manager directly into Qualibrate.""The most valuable feature is that it's user-friendly.""What Qualibrate makes very easy to do is to record a process flow. Within five minutes you have a clear document produced by Qualibrate. Instead of using Word, and copying and pasting pictures into it from printscreens, within five minutes what you have was easy to make and it's easy for users to use."

More Qualibrate Pros →

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

More IBM Rational Functional Tester Cons →

"Not everything in SAP works well with Qualibrate. There is a development tool called xpath and you have to program it. We always thought it wouldn't be necessary to program it with Qualibrate, that everything could be solved by Qualibrate without programming, but you have to program some things. Using xpath is more complicated, and not easy for everybody. It would be helpful if there were a no-code solution for this.""What I would really like to see is if you are running scripts in Qualibrate, and there is a defect, then you can have it automatically raise a defect in your own ticketing system.""There is a module that we would like to have. We would like Qualibrate to design a requirements module so that we can design our testing, our flows, and our scenarios based on our actual requirements. Right now, we're doing that, but we're having to do it outside of Qualibrate. For example, in Excel, we might have a list of 50, 60, or 70 different requirements and combinations of tests that need to be executed, and since that module doesn't exist in Qualibrate, we're doing it offline. We have already vocalized that wishlist to them, and they have acknowledged it, but I have no idea when they're going to get around to deploying something like that. It is probably number one on our list.""What could be improved would be the intuitiveness of the reporting engine. It does have reporting, i.e., a dashboard, but it is preconfigured, predefined KPIs and datasets. That could be improved because the datasets don't have descriptions, so you really need to know what you're doing. Whereas, it would be great if it could have more descriptions and be easy to build your own KPIs.""We had an issue with SAP when using PDF forms. That was something that was not supported by Qualibrate, but we solved that issue by choosing another solution. That was the only wish we had with Qualibrate."

More Qualibrate Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
  • "Qualibrate is realistically priced. I can't compare it because I haven't looked at other tools, but I think it is good. What I like is you can simply add new users, if you want. It has a license model that comes with different types of users, which I think makes sense."
  • "Automated testing is not cheap. But other companies, for example, Panaya, required a minimum of 10 licenses. Qualibrate allowed us to start small, with three licenses, with a price that was competitive within the market."
  • "We signed a three-year contract and the pricing is in line with our expectations."
  • "We probably have 10 licenses, but I don't know what are the costs or anything like that."
  • "I compared the prices of the 15 solutions we looked at. Qualibrate was the most valuable because it could be integrated with SAP Solution Manager."
  • More Qualibrate Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    653,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:RFT needs to think from a contemporary point of view — from the current context. They need to look at the way they're positioning the tool. They need to do a complete revamp so that even a… more »
    Top Answer:Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time.
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature is that it's user-friendly.
    Top Answer:We signed a three-year contract and the pricing is in line with our expectations. If you look at the cost of your license and what is required, you will see that it is better to keep everything… more »
    Top Answer:What I would really like to see is if you are running scripts in Qualibrate, and there is a defect, then you can have it automatically raise a defect in your own ticketing system. We do not use the… more »
    Ranking
    25th
    Views
    2,435
    Comparisons
    1,426
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    225
    Rating
    8.0
    14th
    Views
    635
    Comparisons
    197
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    1,892
    Rating
    8.8
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Rational Functional Tester
    Learn More
    Qualibrate
    Video Not Available
    Overview
    IBM Rational Functional Tester is an automated functional testing and regression testing tool. This software provides automated testing capabilities for functional, regression, GUI, and data-driven testing. Rational Function Tester supports a range of applications, such as web-based, .Net, Java, Siebel, SAP, terminal emulator-based applications, PowerBuilder, Ajax, Adobe Flex, Dojo Toolkit, GEF, Adobe PDF documents, zSeries, iSeries, and pSeries.
    Undertaking a software transformation journey is a high risk. We offer a simple yet powerful solution to minimize the risk and reduce the implementation resources up to 80%.

    Qualibrate is the cloud solution for SAP & web apps test automation, like Salesforce: it has the power of simplicity, customization, and integration with the most CI/CD tools. Test cases are highly reusable and easily maintainable.

    All you need to do is to record a Business Process: user actions, test data, and technical information will be captured. The recording will be your unique source of truth for running Automated tests and Manual tests, but also for Learning.
    Offer
    Learn more about IBM Rational Functional Tester
    Learn more about Qualibrate
    Sample Customers
    Edumate
    AirFrance KLM, Provincie Noord Holland, Ministerie van Defensie, Nouryon, Bell Helicopter, Textron,
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Comms Service Provider12%
    Government9%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company45%
    Comms Service Provider14%
    Energy/Utilities Company7%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business11%
    Midsize Enterprise33%
    Large Enterprise56%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise65%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business36%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise50%
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    October 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, SeleniumHQ, Micro Focus and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: October 2022.
    653,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    IBM Rational Functional Tester is ranked 25th in Functional Testing Tools with 1 review while Qualibrate is ranked 14th in Functional Testing Tools with 5 reviews. IBM Rational Functional Tester is rated 8.0, while Qualibrate is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Functional Tester writes "Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qualibrate writes "Fairly advanced, very scalable, and will provide long-term value in terms of time savings and alleviation of stress for the team". IBM Rational Functional Tester is most compared with Selenium HQ, Micro Focus UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, SmartBear TestComplete and Worksoft Certify, whereas Qualibrate is most compared with Tricentis Tosca and Worksoft Certify.

    See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

    We monitor all Functional 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.