OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs Qualibrate comparison

Read 5 Qualibrate reviews

151 Views
49 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

OpenText UFT Digital Lab and Qualibrate are complementary products in the software testing tools category. Qualibrate appears to have the advantage due to its advanced automation and ROI, despite higher initial setup costs, while OpenText offers extensive test management capabilities supporting cross-platform testing.

Features: OpenText UFT Digital Lab supports cross-platform testing, seamless debugging and integration with multiple development environments, and extensive test management. Qualibrate provides agile automation, powerful simulation capabilities, and enhanced collaboration tools for agile teams.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT Digital Lab could benefit from simplifying its extensive features for agile teams, reducing its setup costs, and enhancing collaboration tools. Qualibrate requires improvement in initial setup cost efficiency, broader customer service options, and integration with a wider range of enterprise tools.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText UFT Digital Lab offers straightforward deployment and robust customer service support, suitable for large enterprises. Qualibrate features a cloud-based deployment model requiring less infrastructure investment, encouraging quick adoption by smaller teams, though its customer service is more limited in comparison.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT Digital Lab has a higher initial setup cost but provides long-term value through its comprehensive feature set. Qualibrate, although more expensive initially, delivers excellent ROI through effective automation and lower maintenance costs, making it ideal for organizations focusing on agile adaptability.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. Qualibrate Report (Updated: March 2025).

OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. Qualibrate

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

OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

18th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (5th)

Qualibrate

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

38th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (22nd), Test Automation Tools (39th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 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 Qualibrate is 0.2%, up from 0.1% 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

Reviewer148493

Test Manager at a government with 10,001+ employees

Reduces our testing time significantly, enabling us to release more frequently

The most valuable feature is the way it works, the usability. From the first setup, the user interface is the most beautiful. It's very nice the way you can recover things and make it work. We use the solution’s Test Planning & test Execution Scheduling features, and they are very important. They are easy to work with. We use SAP Solution Manager, and Qualibrate works with it, enabling us to manage all our tests, taking them from Solution Manager directly into Qualibrate. Because everything we do is in SAP Solution Manager, we are now able to do test automatization, combined with Qualibrate. All the defects are available in SAP Solution Manager and all the changes will be in Qualibrate, immediately. From Qualibrate, we see whether tests are good or not. We can create a test-related incident in Solution Manager for those that are not good, and Test Suite in Solution Manager will notify the person who has to rebuild it. That works very nicely.

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

"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."

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

"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."

"The product is easy to use."

"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."

"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 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 widget's ease of use is the most valuable, which means it allows you or business people to record the automated test scripts. In most cases, it is really good because it is the business people who actually know how the system is being used. The simplicity of the design is valuable, where you can record your transactions, then create your automated scripts. You can automate it at the same time, and the automation features are cool."

"What Qualibrate makes very easy to do is to record a process flow. Within five minutes you have a clear document produced by Qualibrate. Instead of using Word, and copying and pasting pictures into it from printscreens, within five minutes what you have was easy to make and it's easy for users to use."

"The most valuable feature is that it's user-friendly."

"It is the principle functionality that we're leveraging, which really can be defined as recordings and playbacks. So, you record the scripts that you want to execute and you also want to be able to playback. So, these are the features that we are largely leveraging. There are flows and scenarios, and they are the design aspects that fit within the playback and the recording solution. For me, they are the core of Qualibrate, and that's what we're using."

"We use the solution’s Test Planning & test Execution Scheduling features, and they are very important. They are easy to work with. We use SAP Solution Manager, and Qualibrate works with it, enabling us to manage all our tests, taking them from Solution Manager directly into Qualibrate."

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."

"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."

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

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

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

"What I would really like to see is if you are running scripts in Qualibrate, and there is a defect, then you can have it automatically raise a defect in your own ticketing system."

"We had an issue with SAP when using PDF forms. That was something that was not supported by Qualibrate, but we solved that issue by choosing another solution. That was the only wish we had with Qualibrate."

"Not everything in SAP works well with Qualibrate. There is a development tool called xpath and you have to program it. We always thought it wouldn't be necessary to program it with Qualibrate, that everything could be solved by Qualibrate without programming, but you have to program some things. Using xpath is more complicated, and not easy for everybody. It would be helpful if there were a no-code solution for this."

"There is a module that we would like to have. We would like Qualibrate to design a requirements module so that we can design our testing, our flows, and our scenarios based on our actual requirements. Right now, we're doing that, but we're having to do it outside of Qualibrate. For example, in Excel, we might have a list of 50, 60, or 70 different requirements and combinations of tests that need to be executed, and since that module doesn't exist in Qualibrate, we're doing it offline. We have already vocalized that wishlist to them, and they have acknowledged it, but I have no idea when they're going to get around to deploying something like that. It is probably number one on our list."

"What could be improved would be the intuitiveness of the reporting engine. It does have reporting, i.e., a dashboard, but it is preconfigured, predefined KPIs and datasets. That could be improved because the datasets don't have descriptions, so you really need to know what you're doing. Whereas, it would be great if it could have more descriptions and be easy to build your own KPIs."

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."

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

"The product could be more affordable."

"Qualibrate is realistically priced. I can't compare it because I haven't looked at other tools, but I think it is good. What I like is you can simply add new users, if you want. It has a license model that comes with different types of users, which I think makes sense."

"I compared the prices of the 15 solutions we looked at. Qualibrate was the most valuable because it could be integrated with SAP Solution Manager."

"Automated testing is not cheap. But other companies, for example, Panaya, required a minimum of 10 licenses. Qualibrate allowed us to start small, with three licenses, with a price that was competitive within the market."

"We signed a three-year contract and the pricing is in line with our expectations."

"We probably have 10 licenses, but I don't know what are the costs or anything like that."

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

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

22%

Computer Software Company

21%

Non Profit

Manufacturing Company

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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?

Sometimes, it's challenging to have relations with OpenText support.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?

We use it in financial services companies to automate mobile solutions and applications.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Perfecto vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 24% of the time

Sauce Labs vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 18% of the time

BrowserStack vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 17% of the time

Appium vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 16% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 14% of the time

More OpenText UFT Digital Lab Competitors

No data available

Product Reports

OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Download OpenText UFT Digital Lab product report

Download Qualibrate product report

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

Our enterprise-level solution is a complete, centralized lab of real mobile devices and emulators. With remote access, developers and testers can develop, debug, test, monitor, and optimize mobile apps from anywhere.

OpenText

Undertaking a software transformation journey is a high risk. We offer a simple yet powerful solution to minimize the risk and reduce the implementation resources up to 80%.

Qualibrate is the cloud solution for SAP & web apps test automation, like Salesforce: it has the power of simplicity, customization, and integration with the most CI/CD tools. Test cases are highly reusable and easily maintainable.

All you need to do is to record a Business Process: user actions, test data, and technical information will be captured. The recording will be your unique source of truth for running Automated tests and Manual tests, but also for Learning.

Sample Customers

Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB

AirFrance KLM, Provincie Noord Holland, Ministerie van Defensie, Nouryon, Bell Helicopter, Textron,

OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. Qualibrate