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

LambdaTest vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

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

LambdaTest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (8th)
OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 5.3%, up from 5.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 1.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
LambdaTest5.3%
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web1.2%
Other93.5%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Dinesh Saharan - PeerSpot reviewer
The tool reduces the manual effort needed and helps automate certain tasks for users
I won't be able to comment on what could be improved in the solution since I am not the one who handles LambdaTest. It is our company's IT team that takes care of LambdaTest. Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis. If something is perfect, it doesn't mean that it doesn't need to improvise or improve, like in terms of adding new features. There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time.
Robinson Caiado - PeerSpot reviewer
Automates mobile solutions while boosting productivity and fostering innovation
It allows multiple devices to be used and gives flexibility in adding devices when a project is needed. Most of the time, I have several devices where it is predefined. We can use it, but sometimes, we must scale it in a particular situation. It's very flexible. It is very important because we can use a different approach to software testing, for example, to find a way to execute UFT software testing with only one execution. This reproduces all the platforms that we need.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"HyperExecute adds significant speed to execution, enhancing the overall testing process."
"LambdaTest offers geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"The technical support services are excellent."
"We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring."
"The support docs are precise and you can get started with them easily."
"Automation and mobile testing have improved our efficiency."
"The primary feature that has significantly improved our test execution times is automation."
"The Docker tunnel integration for local testing can be extremely useful to run on multiple instances in parallel."
"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."
"The fact that it allows users to test on real mobile devices instead of emulators is something that projects have told us is beyond compare."
"The product is easy to use."
"The solution is easy to use. There are features to orchestrate mobile testing, including mobile testing automation. You can test different devices at the same time."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."
 

Cons

"Responsive testing UI is a bit cluttered, whereas the LT browser is much better to use."
"I feel that the automated screenshot testing takes a little longer on MacOS sometimes."
"There is scope for improvement in service account usage, LDAP integration, and adapting new devices and features."
"If possible to simulate the finger pinch, it would make it more realistic."
"The tool can improve its testing speed. Changing or switching to another mobile phone can be very slow on a real device."
"You cannot perform native-app testing, as they offer simulation for web testing only."
"I've also had some issues with the speed of certain API calls and the rendering of data. For example, when I'm onboarding data, the process can be slow."
"It would be nice to have an API for visual regression testing."
"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."
"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."
"We need to scale devices easily. Some customers would like to loop in AWS or other cloud providers to check if their devices have the cloud factor. OpenText UFT Digital Lab needs to improve it."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"For the most part, the key challenge is ensuring that customers fully utilize the product as intended and adopt the appropriate frameworks to implement the solutions effectively."
"OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web could benefit from implementing a low-code, no-code solution that aids in quick automation code preparation."
"We like to host the tools centrally. We would need them to be multi-tenants, so different projects could log on and have their own set of devices and their own set of apps, and they wouldn't see data from other projects that are using it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an affordable product."
"The product can be described as an averagely-priced solution."
"I used the product for free."
"LambdaTest is paid per execution."
"From the customer side, LambdaTest is cheaper for big company usage and works fine as other similar applications."
"LambdaTest is priced well, which is why we migrated to it."
"LambdaTest is on the cloud, offers both free and paid plans which start at $19 USD per month."
"LambdaTest's pricing is cheaper than that of other similar platforms."
"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."
"While the pricing may seem relatively high, when compared to competitors, it often falls in line or can even be more cost-effective."
"The product could be more affordable."
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
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Retailer
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Non Profit
10%
Educational Organization
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about LambdaTest?
We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LambdaTest?
The pricing of LambdaTest depends on the deal negotiated. It is cost-effective compared to competitors like BrowserStack ( /products/browserstack-reviews ) and Sauce Labs ( /products/sauce-labs-rev...
What needs improvement with LambdaTest?
The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting. There are specific use cases related to authentication and authoriz...
What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web could benefit from implementing a low-code, no-code solution that aids in quick automation code preparation. Additionally, from a strategic standp...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web can be used for a range of applications, not just web and mobile. It works very well for SAP, which is an enterprise platform. It can be used for ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bringmax, Totpal, Nethhouse, Integreplanner, Cognizant, Vendisol, Clearscale, Edureka
Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Find out what your peers are saying about LambdaTest vs. OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,513 professionals have used our research since 2012.