OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs ReadyAPI Test comparison

OpenText and SmartBear are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #17 with an average rating of 8.0, while SmartBear is ranked #21 with an average rating of 7.3. OpenText holds a 0.9% mindshare in FT, compared to SmartBear’s 0.7% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of SmartBear users who would recommend it.

OpenText Functional Testing...

Read 18 OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web reviews

908 Views
599 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

ReadyAPI Test

Read 31 ReadyAPI Test reviews

1,619 Views
324 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing...

ReadyAPI Test

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

ReadyAPI Test and OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web are prominent tools in the test automation category. ReadyAPI Test is often preferred due to its attractive pricing and effective support, while OpenText's comprehensive feature set and advanced analytics give it an edge for those seeking robust functionality.

Features: ReadyAPI Test provides seamless integration, advanced scripting capabilities, and efficient test creation. On the other hand, OpenText offers comprehensive mobile and web testing capabilities, extensive test case management, and advanced analytics.

Room for Improvement: ReadyAPI Test could enhance its feature set for more complex testing scenarios, improve its analytics capabilities, and expand its mobile testing options. OpenText could streamline its user interface for a more intuitive user experience, simplify its integration capabilities, and shorten the deployment time.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: ReadyAPI Test is known for a straightforward deployment and responsive customer service. OpenText requires a more detailed setup process but provides robust support and comprehensive resources for complex deployments.

Pricing and ROI: ReadyAPI Test offers competitive pricing and a high ROI due to its cost-effective setup. Conversely, OpenText requires a higher initial investment but justifies its price with extensive features, potential long-term savings, and efficient testing processes.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI Test Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI Test

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 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

17th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (4th)

ReadyAPI Test

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

21st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (9th), API Testing Tools (9th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 0.9%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 0.7%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Robinson Caiado

Sales Leader at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees

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.

Read full review

Luis Sanchez

Senior Quality Assurance Test Engineer at Dormakaba

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.

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 most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."

"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."

"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."

"The product is easy to use."

"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."

"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 Pro and free version of SoapUI Pro has good technical support."

"The interface is user-friendly."

"One good feature is SoapUI's URL check, which allows you to check among the applications. I'm not just talking about the ones for Android. It has all kinds of multi-world tests that are really helpful."

"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, it's easy to use and easy to teach to others."

"The solution offers excellent integration capabilities."

"API mockups, functional testing, and load testing are valuable features."

"The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on."

"The out-of-the-box support for the database is a valuable feature."

Cons

"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."

"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."

"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."

"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."

"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."

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

"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 current interface is unsatisfactory."

"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."

"The UI should be improved."

"We tried automation but it's not easy to integrate with the synching and some of the mission tools that we use for automated testing of APIs."

"Grouping of the cases is not possible in SoapUI, to my knowledge. When working with critical cases or the, we were not able to group them properly. We can definitely create a suite and add them there, but within a whole suite, we have to identify them, which was not easy."

"The UI could be a bit more flexible."

"If the load and bare minimum could be defined, I would give this solution a higher rating."

"There aren't any plugins for UI automation. You need to make a custom code and download a job to put into the libraries. If it were panelized, then it would be straightforward. It should be in a panel of the tools, so you can add those tools as your test step in your test cases."

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."

"The product could be more affordable."

"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."

"The cost is not that bad."

"It is free of charge."

"ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten."

"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."

"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."

"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."

"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."

"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."

More ReadyAPI Test pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

17%

Non Profit

10%

Educational Organization

Financial Services Firm

21%

Insurance Company

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

What do you like most about SoapUI Pro?

The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with SoapUI Pro?

See all answers

Comparisons

Sauce Labs vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 18% of the time

Perfecto vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 12% of the time

BrowserStack vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 12% of the time

Appium vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 10% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 10% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web Competitors

Postman Enterprise vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 57% of the time

ReadyAPI vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 7% of the time

Broadcom Service Virtualization vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 6% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 6% of the time

Katalon Studio vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 6% of the time

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

August 2025

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web report

Download OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web product report

Buyer's Guide

ReadyAPI Test

August 2025

Download ReadyAPI Test product report

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

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

For REST, SOAP and other popular API and IoT protocols, SoapUI NG Pro provides the industry's most comprehensive and easy-to-learn functional testing capabilities. Based on open core technology proven by millions of community members, SoapUI NG Pro helps you ensure that your APIs perform as intended, meet your business requirements, timeframes, and team skill sets right from day one.

SmartBear

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

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI Test

July 2025

Free Report: OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI Test

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI Test and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI Test report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional Testing 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.