We performed a comparison between LambdaTest and Telerik Test Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Without a doubt, LambdaTest is one of the big reasons behind our faster deployment and better team collaboration."
"Stability-wise, I have not experienced any downtime or other performance issues."
"The real devices feature is the most valuable feature for us."
"The most valuable feature is the real-time testing, which helps you to test your website on more than two thousand combinations of browsers and operating systems."
"The UI is pretty clean and easy to navigate, and we were able to figure it out very quickly."
"The most valuable features are that it's essentially on-demand, and you only focus on getting the code that needs to be executed without having to worry about the OS, hardware, etc."
"Builds that took days to complete with in-house infrastructure were executed in a couple of hours."
"The support docs are precise and you can get started with them easily."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"The analytics over the automation dashboard can be more intuitive."
"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."
"If possible to simulate the finger pinch, it would make it more realistic."
"LambdaTest needs to have native application testing, which would be a great help to my team."
"The scalability is good with Amazon, but IBM had some issues."
"Their smart testing module needs improvement."
"I think Lambdatest is a valuable tool for our team and things that have room for improvement would be mobile app testing, as it can be an important addition to the tool."
"It would be nice to have an API for visual regression testing."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."
LambdaTest is ranked 14th in Test Automation Tools with 18 reviews while Telerik Test Studio is ranked 18th in Test Automation Tools with 5 reviews. LambdaTest is rated 9.0, while Telerik Test Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of LambdaTest writes "Cost-effective, good integration, and parallel testing leads to good performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Telerik Test Studio writes "Very good performance and load testing capabilities". LambdaTest is most compared with BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca and Perfecto, whereas Telerik Test Studio is most compared with Selenium HQ, Ranorex Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, Katalon Studio and Tricentis Tosca. See our LambdaTest vs. Telerik Test Studio report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors, best Functional Testing Tools vendors, and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.
