We performed a comparison between Qualibrate and Worksoft Certify based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools."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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It is very user-friendly with an appealing UI, unlike a lot of other automation tools that we have evaluated. The fact that it can be used to across SAP and non-SAP applications (including web-based apps) is a big advantage. Using Certify Process Capture functionality has helped in hassle free test design creation, without the need to spend any extra effort to capture test steps and screenshots. The integration elements across HPE ALM and Solution Manager also work well."
"The most valuable feature is having a no-code solution for automation, so our QA team and some of our business users can work on automation. Then, they don't have to be developers."
"Mostly in the area of project testing, the most immediate benefit is when you historically have manual testers do a certain job, and a full regression testing was previously done 100 percent manually. We have had cases where the release testing for an entire region would take around 12 weeks. With Worksoft, we are now down to two to three weeks. So, that is one use case where we have had success."
"We are mainly using it for the SAP application, and for the SAP application, if you don't have any experience with automation tools, after a few training sessions, you can easily automate the scripts. That's because no specific programming language is used. All resources that I have are specifically SAP resources. They are not from the automation background, but after gaining the knowledge, they are able to develop a script, or when there is any issue while doing regression testing, they are at least able to understand the issue, such as whether the issue is in the code or data."
"The most valuable feature is its time saving. Once development is complete, the short time that it takes to execute a test is invaluable. It saves a number of dollars and man-hours."
"It is very easy to maintain. With scripts, I can change one line and in one step. Whatever I want, I can do. I don't need to be an expert to use it."
"Worksoft Certify supports multiple interfaces and applications like SAP, Web, or Silverlight Java, and Mainframe. It is easily integrated."
"During our yearly upgrades, we have now gotten them down to ten days or less. We have Worksoft run all our integration tests, where it used to take probably six weeks to do that manually."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The technical support has been good, but sometimes there are little delays. A lot of times when we need support, it's an emergency situation."
"We can't get the process intelligence module to work properly. We can't get the impact comment that analyzes the incoming development code to run, either. We've also had bugs in the CTM and execution manager in the past year. It took technical support a long time to resolve this issue. We escalated it so that the vice president of the company was included as well."
"With one of our applications where we do check-in, Worksoft is not able to identify the Java-based application. We raised the ticket, but we were unable to resolve this using Worksoft."
"Worksoft Certify's tech support's response time could be improved."
"I would like to see the impact analysis integrated with the performance testing tool. We have multiple tools doing multiple items. I would like to have one common tool."
"Better automation capability would be helpful."
"The web application should be more robust."
"The overall speed and performance of this solution could be improved. In a future release, it would be useful to be able to do API testing."
Earn 20 points
Qualibrate is ranked 34th in Test Automation Tools while Worksoft Certify is ranked 8th in Test Automation Tools with 64 reviews. Qualibrate is rated 8.8, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Qualibrate writes "Reduces our testing time significantly, enabling us to release more frequently". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". Qualibrate is most compared with , whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and UiPath Test Suite.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors, best Functional Testing 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.