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

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs ReadyAPI Test 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

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)
ReadyAPI Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
22nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (10th), API Testing Tools (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 1.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 0.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web1.2%
ReadyAPI Test0.9%
Other97.9%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Luis Sanchez - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps in data, regression, performance, security, and functional testing
ReadyAPI Test needs to improve its reporting. While reports provide essential information when issues arise, or tests fail, having more graphical representations directly within the reports would be beneficial. It needs to improve stability and scalability as well. The tool's support is slow, and takes months to reach a solution.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
"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."
"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 most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."
"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."
"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"The Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."
"We used to write our own solutions, from small scripts to task web services, so this saves us thousands of hours."
"SoapUI Pro is a good tool when it comes to API design and orchestration. Additionally, it is beneficial for functional and for performance testing."
"It clearly makes it easy to test APIs based on the SOAP protocol. We are a logistics company, and we have lots of tracking calls coming in. We provide APIs for tracking services, and it makes sense for us to use SoapUI to test them thoroughly."
"ReadyAPI has the power to enrich all the technical work. You can achieve any complex task using ReadyAPI. I can also do UI automation with ReadyAPI. In a few test cases, we want to check the API and the equivalent UI. I download a job and write a piece of Groovy or Java code. It's almost the same in ReadyAPI. I can do that in a single test case. ReadyAPI is a powerful tool because you can do anything you want, but only you need to download the right set of jobs and produce the right set of code."
"API mockups, functional testing, and load testing are valuable features."
"The utmost importance lies in the performance of the application."
"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."
 

Cons

"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I would like more documentation, training, tutorials, etc. Also, I don't particularly appreciate that I have to save everything. It takes up a lot of space on my laptop, but I have to install the WSDL again If I don't save it."
"If the load and bare minimum could be defined, I would give this solution a higher rating."
"It is limited to scope and risk services only. It does have some support for JMS, but it is not out-of-the-box; you have to do some tweaks here and there."
"There are no bugs or glitches, but a few features available only in the Pro version could be made available in the open-source version. Some of the features do not necessarily need to be only available to Pro users. The data generator would be really useful for the open-source version users."
"Automation features are not user-friendly."
"Occasionally, when you are saving, the solution can hang."
"Could integrate the graphing module for load testing."
"The UI should be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product could be more affordable."
"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."
"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."
"The cost is not that bad."
"SoapUI Pro is open source but it has a subscription-based model which involves some more features. At the moment we are using the free version. The Pro version requires a license, and it is an annual license to use it."
"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."
"ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten."
"We have team members who are working in shifts, and it is not possible for us to utilize a single license on a single piece of hardware so that multiple team members can use it. We have to take out multiple licenses for each team member."
"My understanding is that the pricing is okay, however, that's taken care of by our procurement team. It's around $5,000 for three years."
"It is free of charge."
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
19%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Non Profit
10%
Educational Organization
5%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
13%
Insurance Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

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 ...
What do you like most about SoapUI Pro?
The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SoapUI Pro?
ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten.
What needs improvement with SoapUI Pro?
ReadyAPI Test needs to improve its reporting. While reports provide essential information when issues arise, or tests fail, having more graphical representations directly within the reports would b...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
SoapUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Apple, Cisco, FedEx, eBay, Microsoft, MasterCard, Pfizer, Nike, Oracle, Volvo, Lufthansa, Disney, HP, Intel, U.S. Air Force, Schindler
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI Test and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,513 professionals have used our research since 2012.