We performed a comparison between Testim and UiPath Test Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The REST API features allowed integrated testing for select products to quickly make calls and test the UIs with API calls while the CLI allows us to matrix the grid function across browsers."
"It is a highly stable solution."
"The pre-defined tests are a great help, specifically the custom JS test that allows us to be able to use custom code to test complicated elements or scenarios."
"The product is easy to use."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the recently added AI feature."
"The automating smoke and regression tests have become easier and handier and manual efforts are saved."
"Testim introduces three services covering validation steps, eliminating the necessity to write complex code."
"We added Testim to our CI flow. It allows us to test only tasks that already passed sanity tests."
"We also don't develop test robots like typing codes; we program them with drag-and-drop features."
"The detailed logging is invaluable."
"Test Suite has multiple tools that are fully integrated. It has everything you need to record your test cases, generate your documentation, and integrate synthetic data with your Orchestrator. I like the integrated aspect of it. The biggest advantage of UiPath is that it not only tests but also integrates with all the other services to offer a complete package."
"UiPath's tools are generally designed for business users, so they can be as simple or as complex as needed."
"It's effective at testing whatever automation we've built or making sure the automation we've built is working fine."
"Our team used to require five to six days to complete the entire release or execution cycle. Now, we're able to complete it within just one or one and a half days."
"The console, in a single pane, allows us to understand where we are in the testing environment."
"It facilitates the delegation of control to multiple users and offers an efficient way to organize tasks using labels."
"The product's areas of improvement include pricing considerations and additional features related to visual testing and PDF handling."
"There were some issues in the product's initial setup phase in regard to the area of documentation since it wasn't very easy to understand everything mentioned in it."
"I get a little bit confused while creating new branches."
"The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved."
"The accessibility reporting features could be more robust to be reported at the script level and allow users to map down to the step level."
"Testim sometimes fails due to stability issues. It doesn't always work consistently, especially after running multiple tests."
"There are common properties between multiple elements that we should be able to edit - such as 'when this step fails,' 'when to run this step,' and 'override timeout'. I should be able to update these properties if I select multiple elements."
"The UI could use a better design with a better user experience in mind."
"UiPath’s Test Suite manual testing doesn’t work for our organization based on how the QA Analysts do their manual testing and the artifacts that are needed for deployment."
"Our primary application is built on Windows, so we've faced no significant challenges. However, I think mobile automation is one area where the solution still needs some work."
"We are facing problems specifically with Desk Manager."
"The product releases sometimes have issues."
"Orchestrator is not easy to use or understand."
"We have output arguments in the workflow. We can check results only by using those arguments. It would be better to have some more options, such as screen variables. For example, in a workflow, if we want to check if an activity is present inside, we should be able to get the output to UiPath Test Suite through the activity itself. That would be great for testing."
"We'd like to see the solution integrate with more code or local frameworks."
"Storing the test scripts is what needs to improve in the UiPath Test Suite, as it's currently a challenge to some extent. Maintaining the files is a bit challenging, especially when you need to keep those locally."
Testim is ranked 10th in Test Automation Tools with 8 reviews while UiPath Test Suite is ranked 7th in Test Automation Tools with 17 reviews. Testim is rated 9.2, while UiPath Test Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Testim writes "A stable tool to help users take care of the implementation phases in their environment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UiPath Test Suite writes "Can be used by non-developers, and saves us time, but the manual testing needs improvement". Testim is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Functionize, Applitools and Testsigma, whereas UiPath Test Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, SmartBear TestComplete, Katalon Studio and froglogic Squish. See our Testim vs. UiPath Test Suite report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.
