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

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs Panaya Test Dynamix 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

OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (5th)
Panaya Test Dynamix
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
23rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Defect Tracking (5th), Test Management Tools (18th), Regression Testing Tools (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 2.0%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Panaya Test Dynamix is 1.9%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web2.0%
Panaya Test Dynamix1.9%
Other96.1%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2356440 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Experienced ease in automation with strong support while seeking improvements in low-code options
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web offers flexibility of deployment, from on-premises to UFT One which is on the cloud. They provide capability for immediate deployment, and assets can be migrated easily. They include enablers specifically for quick migration of test assets. While I have not personally been involved in these migrations, I have observed some clients using it directly while others make a complete shift from OpenText to Tricentis platforms. There have not been many clients moving from OpenText platforms from on-premises to cloud because most shifts have been toward different product categories such as Tricentis altogether.
Alain Vanhaeght - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Project leader at a construction company with 10,001+ employees
More than reliable, with satisfied results for our needs, and excellent testing options
For the moment we are looking to automated testing, and there today apparently it is not working well with the application we want to test. So we are using an application on a terminal server and some quirks make it challenging to make automatic testing. It would be nice to be able to test offline. What I mean by that is today most of the time things are in the cloud, but sometimes when we are in factories we do not have network access and we should be able to download a test script into our PCs and do the test offline. Once that is complete we can re-upload it when we again have a network connection.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ease of use and being able to enroll more people into developing test scripts using their AI function, which they call AI but is OCR recognition, is significant."
"Using the existing enterprise tools, like UFT, or even if you want to go open source, you can use them and it's a real user-functional performance, we are able to achieve that."
"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
"We escalate tickets to HPE, and we don't have problems."
"The pricing is great."
"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."
"The product is easy to use."
"It is easy for business users to use who are not familiar with testing tools."
"I like the fact that we have a single platform that provides all the features and where it is possible to have good reporting capabilities as opposed to integrating a few systems in order to achieve some of the functionalities."
"Test migration from HPE are done automatically. We can extract our tests from HPE, and they convert it into the Panaya format."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to copy the scenarios and as we do a rollout we can efficiently complete test three and put it somewhere else under a new subsidiary."
"The initial setup was not complex and the product itself is very easy to configure and use."
"Without Panaya, it will be difficult to manage a large number of test scripts; Panaya is very useful for being organized and structured in managing test scripts, it provides us with actionable insights in real-time into every aspect of our project, and in one click we can see some of the KPIs that are available to us in real-time, which is great."
"Provides better monitoring for testing campaigns and business process testing."
"The test repository to follow the test progress is most valuable because we can easily create and manage a huge number of test scripts. We can copy and paste, replicate, and drag and drop many tests scripts. We can create test scripts en masse. When you have a high volume of tests, the tool is quite useful. It works well when you want to manage a lot of tests, such as you have 1,000 or more test scripts."
 

Cons

"Sometimes, it's challenging to have relations with OpenText support."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"I think the biggest issues that I've seen, and this is a personal view of mine, is that most of the HPE products have a common look and feel to them."
"I think the interface is not very good and I have used other solutions that are easier to learn."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I think the costs can be improved because replacing the existing solutions with Panaya was actually quite expensive."
"They provide options for custom fields or tabs, but customization of workflows would be great."
"The cost of the license was a little expensive, and we didn't deploy Panaya to a large extent to many users."
"Support is reactive and in English only."
"The setup of Panaya Recorder is a bit complex. Panaya is a SaaS application, but you need to install some components on your computer. You need to set up your computer to allow Panaya Recorder to work. There are five or six things to do each time you install Panaya for any user. If you miss something, Panaya Recorder doesn't work. So, it is complex to install."
"It would be nice to be able to test offline. What I mean by that is today most of the time things are in the cloud, but sometimes when we are in factories and we do not have network access and we should be able to download a test script into our PCs and do the test offline. Once that is complete we can re-upload it when we have a network connection."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"While the pricing may seem relatively high, when compared to competitors, it often falls in line or can even be more cost-effective."
"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."
"The product could be more affordable."
"The solution is rather expensive due to the security it has to offer."
"It is expensive. Because of its cost, we couldn't deploy Panaya to a large extent. Its licensing should be improved, and there should be more license types. There should be an advanced license and a basic license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
902,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Non Profit
8%
Manufacturing Company
22%
Retailer
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
Digital Lab is a pretty solid product with areas that could be continuously improved on.
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
I deal with OpenText Analysis Database and Core Performance Engineering, which are categories of software rather than individual pieces. We focus on the ADM area, which includes ALM, UFT One, UFT D...
What advice do you have for others considering Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
I do have experience with OpenText products and OpenText ALM. I have been using ALM Quality Center, which has had a few names for it over time, but it is the old Quality Center that was then rename...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Over 3000 leading enterprises worldwide including SONY, NICE, NEC, Shiseido, DHL, ABB and Grupo Bimbo
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. Panaya Test Dynamix and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.