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

OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs ReadyAPI comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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 UFT Digital Lab
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (6th)
ReadyAPI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT Digital Lab is 0.8%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 1.3%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
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.
Walter Wirch - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamless integration with cloud environments supports backend projects while seeking AWS Lambda enhancements
ReadyAPI enhances my workflows by allowing us to use Docker containers based on the ReadyAPI test runner. It helps extend our functional tests, even though we are not heavily using performance testing. It supports a wide range of protocols such as Kafka and GRPC, depending on the project. It also aids in faster feedback to developers, allowing them to implement developments in a sprint without the need for extensive testing afterwards, thus improving our time to market metrics.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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 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 product is easy to use."
"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."
"ReadyAPI enhances my workflows by allowing us to use Docker containers based on the ReadyAPI test runner."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It's easy to learn how to use it."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."
"The Excel sheet feature is good."
"The feature that allows you to import an API collection or a project is valuable."
"When we are doing API testing we have found it to be very efficient to receive results. Additionally, you are able to do tests directly from the API."
"The two most valuable features we use are the functional test and the security test."
 

Cons

"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"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."
"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."
"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."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"The Property Transfer capability could be more user friendly because it is a bit difficult to understand."
"Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions."
"Advanced functionalities could be improved."
"I don't like how they don't have a clear way to manage tests between multiple projects."
"ReadyAPI can improve because it is limited to only SOAP and REST services. They should update the solution to include more protocols so that other people are not limited to SOAP and REST services. Other than would be able to utilize it."
"The performance in some cases needs improvement. Sometimes it requires too many resources."
"It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today. Other solutions have an in-built mechanism where I can directly and easily connect. An API is more around a user submitting a request on the frontend. It then hits the backend, puts the data, and responds back. If I am hitting MongoDB or NoSQL databases, I do not have ready-made inbuilt solutions in ReadyAPI that can easily help me in automating it faster. In our organization, we deal with NoSQL databases, and therefore, we need Groovy. We just cannot have a connector from ReadyAPI to do that. I have to write Groovy scripts. If you have themes that are predominantly using MongoDB, it leads to more maintenance and support activity because we are introducing more code into our commission. In terms of additional features, it can have cloud support. This is one of the things where we are getting into cloud support. We'll see how it works, but it is one of the doubts that we still have."
"The UI is not user-friendly."
 

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."
"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."
"We pay $3,000 annually for a floating license. actually. That allows another person from my company to use it as well. It's a cloud-based license."
"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."
"The solution is dynamically priced so you only pay for what you use."
"The pricing is very competitive."
"ReadyAPI is moderately priced, with added costs for more plugins."
"For each license, they charge the same amount, which is less than $1,000 for each desktop license."
"It costs approximately $200 000 Taiwan Dollars for three years."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
20%
Non Profit
10%
Healthcare Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
15%
Insurance Company
9%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

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.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
Sometimes, it's challenging to have relations with OpenText support.
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
We use it in financial services companies to automate mobile solutions and applications.
What do you like most about ReadyAPI?
The performance testing capabilities are very good.
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?
In native teams and cloud environments, there is room for improvement. I'm considering the use of AWS and its Lambda functionalities prepared by the vendor. These are more so points from my wishlis...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.