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

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs ZAPTEST comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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)
ZAPTEST
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
32nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (26th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 2.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ZAPTEST is 1.5%, up from 0.6% 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 Web2.1%
ZAPTEST1.5%
Other96.4%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Has reduced the need for scripting knowledge and enabled broader test script creation
The ease of use and zero cost are what I appreciate most about this product. The key for us is their Digital Lab service. With Digital Lab service, you have no control over those devices; you are simply getting an iOS device and using it as it is. Many of our customers are using InTune and other deployment services that have security settings on them. OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web allows us to test with our customers' setup of their device and ensure that the scripts will run against it versus a cloud service that does not have any of their security sizing and cannot truly mimic a real-life scenario. The overall framework of UFT in general helps reduce manual testing efforts for us. 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. By being able to develop scripts that way, you prevent having to know VB script. I have testers who create manual scripts and are already running the test manually; now they can perform that same effort in UFT One, and it creates the scripts so they do not have to recreate them every time. We do use the product's API integrations at some customers, though I am not as familiar with it as some of my colleagues are. My understanding is that for free, you can set up virtual APIs that do not exist yet, allowing you to mimic that behavior even before your APIs have been built. That is a huge selling feature and a significant zero-cost feature in being able to run your API tests even before the API is finished.
it_user362916 - PeerSpot reviewer
System engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
We can write our codes just after the functional docs are prepared, and we can straight away start testing the application in the system testing phase itself.
* Using this tool, we can automate test cases even before the deployment of an application. This can be done by scanning objects from UI mock-ups or screenshots. * One script multi-run technology reduces scripting effort and budget by which you can run one unique script to test multiple platforms. * We can write one code and run it in multiple browsers (Chrome, IE, Firefox anything) and operating systems (Android, Windows, anything). * PDF validation, average colour validation, etc. are better and stable. * We can literally automate anything (not necessarily web applications) using ZAPTEST as it works exactly as a human eye and doesn't dig into application codes. * Partial OCR and block recognization are game changers. * JIRA and ALM integration

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 pricing is great."
"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."
"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."
"We evaluated other mobile testing solutions and found this to be superior to all of them."
"They've all been really satisfied with the scalability of the HPE products."
"The product is easy to use."
"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."
"Customer Service: This is where they truly shine! If we suggest a feature, a new version appears in days with that feature fully realized and working."
"Using ZAPTEST, we can write our codes just after the functional docs are prepared, and we can straight away start testing the application in the system testing phase itself."
"Customer service is excellent."
"On average, I get two cycles per week and that only requires the attention of two people; it saves us a lot of time and gets us to production quicker."
"Customer service has been ZAPTEST's forte; very prompt and helpful."
"The biggest thing this product has done for us is allow us to automate a feature that other commercial and open source tools couldn't do for us."
"Our ROI is 100%."
 

Cons

"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."
"However, in some cases we discovered some issues for HPE support regarding the latest enhancements; the delivery time for these enhancements is not as fast as we would like."
"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."
"However, it is still a young product that is improving leaps and bounds each release."
"I don't think the product as it is right now is going to sell itself, but it's really what are the next steps."
"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."
"It's complex, and you need more skills than in most implementations."
"The save function should be fixed so that I no longer have to add a space to a step and then follow it with a backspace to reenable the save icon."
"The documentation is not keeping up with the rapid development, and updates are very fast."
"We have used multiple data files types as inputs to our existing automation and this product is currently only supporting CSV."
"We cannot have more than one Object Repository for one test."
"I would say the test results features could be made more advanced with options like pie charts, graphs, etc. To be able to visualize the data would be helpful to us."
"A few objects on the .NET platform are not getting identified precisely among similar objects."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The product could be more affordable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Non Profit
8%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Construction Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Healthcare Company
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
 

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
AT&T, Ally Financial, Inc. Standard & Poors, Comcast, Boeing Employee Credit Union, Nordstroms, Bank of New Zealand, Aviva France, Delta Airlines, First National Bank of South Africa, Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, American Well, SuperValu, 24 Hour Fitness, Inc., Lexis Nexis, Cspire Wireless, GE Intelligent Systems, Accenture, Shelter Mutual Insurance, Agco
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ZAPTEST and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.