OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs ReadyAPI comparison

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI

Download the complete report

Helped 900,747 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (6th)

ReadyAPI

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

15th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 1.9%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 1.9%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
ReadyAPI	1.9%
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web	1.9%
Other	96.2%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

reviewer2356440

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.

Read full review

PrashanthKumar

Lead QA Engineer at Msys Technologies

Experience effective testing with flexible licensing alongside pivotal insights on essential improvements

For non-functional testing, I focus on performance and security. For performance and security tests, I used REST API, SoapUI, and JMeter. These tools help us conduct thorough testing across these dimensions. I find ReadyAPI helpful especially in overcoming security issues, as we experienced slowness in the application after merging our JAR files. For instance, if a person wants to access a university database and encounters a timeout error, we learned through ReadyAPI that the issue was due to HTML protocol limits with the payload. We fine-tuned this process to display the expected data effectively. I consider ReadyAPI a cost-effective solution because it covers three verticals without needing to purchase separate tools for security, performance, or functional testing. ReadyAPI is a versatile tool for creating multiple testing frameworks and validating various parameters seamlessly. REST API is the tool I use to test all three types of articles, meaning I validate the APIs I send to my peers or clients for functional testing, and I also perform security testing to ensure the URL and data passed through multiple components adhere to policies and user privileges. This is done through functional security testing using the REST API tool, and for performance, I ensure that applications can be accessed simultaneously by multiple users without hindrance or slowness through thorough performance testing.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ideas and possibilities that this tool has are incredibly useful."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."

"We escalate tickets to HPE, and we don't have problems."

"The solution provides a controlled device farm with the right devices (selected based on analytics), that are readily available (can be reserved), have the right app and can be used for manual or automated tests."

"The product is easy to use."

"We evaluated other mobile testing solutions and found this to be superior to all of them."

"This is a solution that's easy to use and it also gives us the possibility to use real devices connected either on the Mobile Center server or on our own computers and it works with both iOS and Android devices."

"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."

More OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web pros

"Reporting is more robust than other products because test reports can be exported in multiple ways."

"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."

"I recommend this solution to new users because it is the best solution you can get across the globe for API, test automation, and API penetration testing."

"The training for this solution is very good."

"With this solution, we have achieved a fifty-percent gain when it comes to writing test cases."

"It can create stress tests very fast, and some features help you do it fast."

"The dashboards are very good and consolidate all of the tests that you are performing with the client."

"It is the best tool that I have ever seen for API testing."

Cons

"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."

"It's complex, and you need more skills than in most implementations."

"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."

"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."

"Because of connection errors, we've haven't yet been able to set it up properly at my company."

"With versions prior to 2.0 I found that configuration was trickier than it should be, particularly with aspects such as NV."

"I think the interface is not very good and I have used other solutions that are easier to learn."

"It's very new to HP. They need to go beyond the HP world."

More OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web cons

"If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful."

"It is challenging doing upgrades and patches because sometimes the environmental variables or suits in the projects get erased."

"The solution is made up of multiple tools, and the one additional feature we'd like to have is load testing."

"The content on ReadyAPI in SmartBear Academy is outdated."

"Better compatibility or more support for the older versions would be helpful."

"There are lots of options within the solution, however they are not upfront or user-friendly."

"Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs. License prices can be a factor in considering which technologies to adopt."

"We stopped using this solution because of issues with scalability. Performance and memory management both need to be improved because other solutions use less memory for the same amount of data."

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 pricing is very competitive."

"We use fixed licenses, and the last time I checked, I want to say it's around $680 per seat per year."

"If I remember correctly, ReadyAPI costs between $5,000 to $7,000 for five thousand virtual users running it at a given point in time. Other tools, for example, Apache JMeter, can run millions of users at a given time. ReadyAPI is a tool that requires you to pay more money if you want more users to run it for performance testing. For functional testing, each ReadyAPI license costs $1,000, and you do get basic testing, and it's inclusive of one hundred users. In my company, if there's a need for more than one hundred users, my team uses Apache JMeter because it's futile to end up paying $5,000 or $6,000 annually just for performance testing, which can be done in Apache JMeter as well. Given the circumstances, my team does performance testing only towards the end of the fiscal year when the regulatory testing of applications takes place. If I have to run ReadyAPI just for two days or just for ten or fifteen odd days, then it's not worth paying $5,000 for the license with the small number of users provided by ReadyAPI."

"There are costs in addition to the licensing fee. For example, if you want to add the load testing you would pay more."

"The cost of a license is probably around $1,000 to $2,000. Accounting is done by my leadership. I am more into implementations and making sure all things and processes are taken care of and the frameworks are maintained and managed."

"It is expensive. Each user needs to be licensed, and there are different licenses within the product. It starts with 750 euros for a single user per year, but for the full product features, you need to pay a lot more. There are three versions. This cost is for functional testing, and then there is a cost for load testing and virtual services. If you want to use these areas with the functional test license, you are limited. You hit some limits in these functions. If you have all three licenses, then you have full functionality for the API."

"This is a cheap solution when you consider the money that will be saved in testing."

"It costs approximately $200 000 Taiwan Dollars for three years."

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

13%

Construction Company

12%

Computer Software Company

Non Profit

Financial Services Firm

15%

Construction Company

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	13

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	28

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...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI?

Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs. License prices can be a factor in considering which technologies to adopt.

What needs improvement with ReadyAPI?

One issue I found with ReadyAPI is related to event listeners compared to JMeter or SoapUI. We created an in-house dashboard to display automation runs across projects, which required manual updati...

What is your primary use case for ReadyAPI?

My experience with Katalon Studio is that we used Katalon for one of our projects, and then I started leveraging Katalon by integrating it with AI tools, AP tools, and aptly tools. Aptly tool is an...

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Comparisons

Compared 8% of the time

Perfecto vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 5% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 5% of the time

Salesforce Platform vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs ReadyAPI

Compared 8% of the time

Apache JMeter vs ReadyAPI

Compared 8% of the time

Parasoft SOAtest vs ReadyAPI

Compared 7% of the time

ReadyAPI Test vs ReadyAPI

Compared 5% of the time

Panaya Test Dynamix vs ReadyAPI

Compared 3% of the time

Product Reports

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Download OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web product report

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web report

ReadyAPI

Download ReadyAPI product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center

Ready API

Overview

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web offers integration with HPE and non-HPE tools, real device testing, and device management. It supports real-time analytics and multi-platform testing, ensuring traceability and flexibility with decentralized devices.

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is designed to enhance testing efficiency for mobile and desktop applications by allowing ease of integration with different testing environments. It features real-time analytics, supports automated device management, and provides the flexibility of decentralized testing on real devices. With a focus on robust traceability, it stands out as a comprehensive choice for optimizing software development life cycles, especially notable for its ability to support multiple devices simultaneously and strategic scaling through network virtualization and AWS device farm.

What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing Lab?

Ease of Use: Intuitive interface facilitating user engagement.
Integration: Compatible with HPE and non-HPE tools for improved workflow.
Real Device Testing: Ensures testing on actual devices for accurate results.
Automation: Advanced capabilities streamline repetitive testing.
Device Management: Flexible management of decentralized devices.
Multi-Platform Support: Simultaneous testing across various platforms.
Traceability: Strong application delivery traceability for robust tracking.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Scalability: Ability to handle multiple devices and scale as needed.
Flexibility: Deployment options include both on-premises and cloud-based solutions.
Real-Time Analytics: Provides actionable insights for data-driven decisions.
Enhanced Performance: Optimizes the software development lifecycle.
Comprehensive Testing: Facilitates thorough functional and performance testing.

Financial services companies utilize OpenText Functional Testing Lab for optimizing mobile solutions and applications, ensuring a streamlined integration into their Application Lifecycle Management and Unified Functional Testing processes. It aids in functional and performance testing, adapting to both on-premises and cloud deployments to suit industry-specific demands.

OpenText

ReadyAPI stands out for its API testing capabilities and integration with development tools like Jira and Git. Its user-friendly interface and automation with Groovy scripting make it a suitable, efficient choice for developers aiming for seamless project management and test execution.

ReadyAPI presents a comprehensive suite for API testing, supporting functional, performance, and security tasks with minimal coding required. It offers robust integration with tools such as Postman and CI/CD processes, enabling users to manage and automate testing scenarios efficiently. Despite its strengths, users notice limitations in performance and cloud integration, especially in scalability and test management. While it facilitates data-driven testing through Excel and supports on-premise and cloud environments, ReadyAPI could benefit from improved reporting and simpler scripting processes. Its interface and GitHub integration would further enhance its adaptability for larger projects and diverse applications.

What are ReadyAPI's main features?

Smart Assertion: Simplifies API validation with efficient testing mechanisms.
Drag-and-Drop Functionality: Enhances ease of use and streamlines workflow.
Groovy Scripting Automation: Allows for advanced automation without extensive coding.
Data-Driven Testing: Utilizes Excel files for managing test scenarios effectively.
CI/CD Integration: Ensures smooth project management and test execution across development cycles.

Why consider ReadyAPI in your evaluations?

Testing Efficiency: Reduces coding requirements, allowing for rapid test case development and validation.
Tool Integration: Seamless compatibility with platforms like Jira and Postman boosts workflow.
Cost-Effective: Offers a versatile toolset for developers without excessive expenditure.
Reporting Options: Provides comprehensive insights to refine testing outcomes and strategies.

ReadyAPI is principally leveraged by industries that require precise API testing capabilities, spanning functional, performance, and security assessments. Its ease of integrating with CI/CD tools and ability to manage backend APIs make it an ideal choice in sectors that prioritize automation and reliability in testing processes. Companies operating within on-premise and cloud environments benefit from its support for diverse testing needs and scenarios, ensuring improved testing proficiency and response validation.

SmartBear

Sample Customers

Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB

Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI