Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

Digital.ai and Progress Software are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. Digital.ai is ranked #20 with an average rating of 8.0, while Progress Software is ranked #25. Digital.ai holds a 0.3% mindshare in TAt, compared to Progress Software’s 0.8% mindshare. Additionally, 66% of Digital.ai users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Progress Software users who would recommend it.

Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Read 3 Digital.ai Continuous Testing reviews

290 Views
202 Comparison Views

66% willing to recommend

Telerik Test Studio

Read 5 Telerik Test Studio reviews

674 Views
428 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Telerik Test Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Telerik Test Studio and Digital.ai Continuous Testing are software testing products. Digital.ai Continuous Testing may have an upper hand due to its advanced features and integration capabilities.

Features: Telerik Test Studio offers comprehensive test automation, scriptless testing, and flexibility for a user-friendly experience. Digital.ai Continuous Testing provides robust automated testing, advanced integrations, and enables continuous testing in CI/CD pipelines, offering high-level efficiency in complex environments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Telerik Test Studio is straightforward to deploy with strong customer service aiding quick setup. Digital.ai Continuous Testing is more complex but supported by extensive documentation and tailored customer service for large-scale deployments, making it suitable for enterprises.

Pricing and ROI: Telerik Test Studio has competitive setup costs, ideal for smaller teams seeking quick returns. Digital.ai Continuous Testing involves a higher initial cost but delivers significant ROI by improving testing and deployment efficiency, making it a valuable investment for scaling enterprises.

To learn more, read our detailed Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Telerik Test Studio Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Telerik Test Studio

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 846,617 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

Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

20th

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (9th), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (2nd)

Telerik Test Studio

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

25th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (24th), Load Testing Tools (22nd), Regression Testing Tools (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Continuous Testing is 0.3%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 0.8%, down from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

Alan Chiou

PM at Galaxy Software Services

Has Mobile Studio feature which can generate scripts

The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version.

Read full review

Raghvendra Jyothi

Manager Project Management at Capgemini

Very good performance and load testing capabilities

There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.

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

"Experitest is one of the only companies to offer a real device on the cloud to perform testing. They also provide quality documentations that help you navigate and maximize the solution."

"The most valuable part of Experitest is the number of real devices on which the test is run."

"The most useful feature for me is Mobile Studio. It has a UI where I can click on elements, and it generates a script for me. Mobile Studio can generate code from testing steps. I'm using Python with it."

"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."

"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."

"The performance and load testing are very good."

"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."

"The way it identifies elements is good."

Cons

"I would also like to see more videos and descriptions that could make installation more efficient."

"I have been automating tests for many years on many things but not on mobile devices. The amount of time that I have spent on just figuring out how to use Experitest and get it to work was quite long compared to what I have been doing before. I spent the first two weeks just getting it started. It would be good to have some video explanation of how to use it on your devices and get started. Their online documentation is quite good and extensive, but it would be quite good to have some end-to-end examples demonstrated."

"The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version."

"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."

"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."

"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."

"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."

"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We make monthly payments. The cost is dependent on the number of devices we intend to support."

"It is quite fairly priced, but it really depends on your budget. It is somewhere in the mid-range of products. It is not free and it is not QGP that nearly costs a whole house. You pay for the number of users who require access to execute the tests."

"The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker."

"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

24%

Computer Software Company

23%

Insurance Company

Government

Computer Software Company

21%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Government

11%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?

The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Digital.ai Continuous Testing?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?

I'm using Digital.ai Continuous Testing to create and test a mobile application. We're developing and testing a mobile app.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Compared 47% of the time

Perfecto vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Compared 32% of the time

LambdaTest vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Compared 21% of the time

More Digital.ai Continuous Testing Competitors

Selenium HQ vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 37% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 18% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 17% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 13% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 8% of the time

More Telerik Test Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ConformIQ Creator vs. Digital.ai Continuous Testing

March 2025

Download Digital.ai Continuous Testing product report

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download Telerik Test Studio product report

Also Known As

Experitest Seetest, Experitest

No data available

Overview

Experitest's continuous testing solutions enable enterprises to reduce risk and provide their customers satisfying, error-free experiences across all devices and browsers. They seamlessly integrate with best-in-class tools throughout the DevOps pipeline allowing organizations to rapidly deliver highly protected, quality applications at-speed and at-scale.

Digital.ai

Telerik Test Studio is an innovative and easy-to-use automated web, WPF and load testing solution. Test Studio tests support essential technologies like ASP.NET AJAX, Silverlight, PHP and MVC. Test Studio functional testing is a comprehensive yet cost-effective automated testing suite. Users can complete tasks quickly and easily with the product's point-and-click interface, which is augmented by Telerik-exclusive features like a visual storyboard and 3D element selection. Test Studio also offers script-less test automation for Silverlight applications. Test Studio load tests allow users to capture quickly capture, multiply and replay complex web traffic. Record HTTP traffic from desktop browsers, mobile devices and web services, and replay traffic with hundreds or thousands of virtual users spread across multiple machines. Fine-tune your load scenario with data binding, user authentication, and dynamic targets. Test Studio Mobile is an intuitive and easy to use test automation solution for Mobile application testing. Create tests once and test across multiple devices and OS's. The point and click functionality allows users to capture quickly and replay complex mobile testing functionality. There is no need to write a single line of code. Test against any number of real devices as you wish or through an emulator by connecting through Wifi. Test Studio for APIs helps customers verify the integrity and reliability of their APIs in an easy way and incorporate their API testing effort in their continuous testing and delivery process. Test Studio for APIs is used to determine whether APIs return the correct response for a broad range of commonly accepted requests, react properly to edge cases such as failures and unexpected inputs, as well as deliver the responses in an acceptable amount of time.

Progress Software

Sample Customers

Samsung, American Express, Barclays, China Mobile, Citi, Cisco, McAfee

Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Telerik Test Studio

March 2025

Free Report: Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Telerik Test Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Telerik Test Studio report.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing 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.