Telerik Test Studio vs UiPath Test Suite comparison

Progress Software and UiPath are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. Progress Software is ranked #17 with an average rating of 8.3, while UiPath is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. Progress Software holds a 1.0% mindshare in TAt, compared to UiPath’s 4.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Progress Software users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 86% of UiPath users who would recommend it.

Telerik Test Studio

Read 5 Telerik Test Studio reviews

726 Views
477 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

UiPath Test Suite

Read 23 UiPath Test Suite reviews

2,351 Views
1,426 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

Telerik Test Studio

UiPath Test Suite

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Telerik Test Studio and UiPath Test Suite compete in software testing automation, with UiPath often having an advantage due to its sophisticated features, while Telerik is appreciated for its affordability and customer support.

Features: Telerik Test Studio is known for intuitive automation capabilities, strong scriptless testing, and Visual Studio integration. UiPath Test Suite stands out with expansive automation features, AI integration, and native RPA testing, providing platform versatility.

Room for Improvement: Telerik Test Studio could enhance advanced features, expand cloud deployment options, and improve AI capabilities. UiPath Test Suite might benefit from reducing setup costs, enhancing customer service response times, and streamlining user interfaces further.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Telerik Test Studio offers on-premise deployment with responsive customer support. UiPath Test Suite provides both cloud and on-premise options but could improve its service response time.

Pricing and ROI: Telerik Test Studio features a straightforward pricing model with lower initial costs, offering high ROI for smaller teams. UiPath Test Suite, while involving higher setup costs, is often a worthwhile investment for organizations aiming to scale automation and testing.

To learn more, read our detailed Telerik Test Studio vs. UiPath Test Suite Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Telerik Test Studio vs. UiPath Test Suite

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,067 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Telerik Test Studio

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

17th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (17th), Load Testing Tools (12th), Regression Testing Tools (8th)

UiPath Test Suite

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 1.0%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of UiPath Test Suite is 4.4%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

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

Deepak Digar.

QA Manager at Quorum Software

Increases productivity compared to other tools

The reporting could be improved. Often, we need to email a report to higher management, we can directly get the report from there. Also, the error reporting could be better. Building an automation test case from manual cases is easy, but sometimes we feel the process can get lengthy because we cannot create customized functions and the predefined ones are unsuitable for the particular purpose. We need to do a workaround that involves extra steps. I am unsure how UiPath will help with complex processes because they typically have multiple layers of various technologies. It also depends on the data synchronization. For example, if I have posted something in the front end, how long does it take to be reflected in the back end? That also matters because it's passing through different layers. End-to-end automation will be a little bit tricky because there are multiple front-end and back-end software involved. It is easy for either front-end or back-end testing. If we include the back end and front end to create an end-to-end scenario, it will be difficult because sometimes there are different databases and layers connected.

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

"The way it identifies elements is good."

"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 performance and load testing are very good."

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

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

"UiPath Test Suite is user-friendly and operates as a low-code platform."

"We also don't develop test robots like typing codes; we program them with drag-and-drop features."

"Being able to use regular expressions, activities, and attributes is valuable."

"It's effective at testing whatever automation we've built or making sure the automation we've built is working fine."

"It facilitates the delegation of control to multiple users and offers an efficient way to organize tasks using labels."

"We are finding bugs and defects much faster."

"We could use it for Oracle and SAP and it did help significantly."

"The detailed logging is invaluable."

More UiPath Test Suite pros

Cons

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

"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."

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

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

"I don't rate its ability to automate very well."

"We'd like to see the solution integrate with more code or local frameworks."

"With Selenium, there is a plugin called Healenium, which helps automatically detect changed properties of objects. With one click, it automatically updates the object repository with the changed properties. I would like UiPath to add that capability."

"I'd like the solution to be even more automated."

"We are able to automate most tasks by using UiPath. Its interface is fine. However, its price is a bit high."

"The reporting could be improved. Often, we need to email a report to higher management, we can directly get the report from there. Also, the error reporting could be better."

"More precise logging would be appreciated."

"We are facing problems specifically with Desk Manager."

More UiPath Test Suite cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"I wasn't involved in the negotiations for the UiPath Test Suite, so I have no information on its pricing."

"One robot license costs 1,500 euros."

"I don't necessarily have a problem with the pricing of the UiPath Test Suite, especially because we're using the testing bot licenses as opposed to the unattended licensing."

"It represents good value for the investment."

"When we decided to buy the solution three and a half years ago, it was fairly priced."

"I am not aware of the exact cost. It seems reasonable, but it is an additional cost."

"Regarding the pricing model, I believe it would be beneficial to combine it with some of the other platform aspects."

"Its price is a bit high."

More UiPath Test Suite pricing and cost advice

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

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Government

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Healthcare Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Telerik Test Studio?

The way it identifies elements is good.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Telerik Test Studio?

Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy. In addition, sometimes, tests used to fail intermittently. These were the two disadvantages.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Telerik Test Studio?

Instead of Telerik Test Studio, I'd recommend writing test cases in .Net so that in the future, if you move away from Telerik Test Studio to another tool, it would be easier for you. Your current c...

See all answers

What do you like most about UiPath Test Suite?

Being able to use regular expressions, activities, and attributes is valuable.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for UiPath Test Suite?

UiPath Test Suite is costly; the licenses are expensive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with UiPath Test Suite?

More precise logging would be appreciated. Additionally, addressing some bugs could improve functionality, and pricing could be more competitive.

See all answers

Comparisons

Selenium HQ vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 38% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 16% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 15% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 11% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 10% of the time

More Telerik Test Studio Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs UiPath Test Suite

Compared 40% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs UiPath Test Suite

Compared 21% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs UiPath Test Suite

Compared 10% of the time

Eggplant Test vs UiPath Test Suite

Compared 9% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs UiPath Test Suite

Compared 6% of the time

More UiPath Test Suite Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

December 2024

Download Telerik Test Studio product report

Buyer's Guide

UiPath Test Suite

November 2024

Download UiPath Test Suite product report

Learn More

Progress Software

Video not available

UiPath

Overview

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.

Transform automated testing for your software, automations, and QA teams with Test Suite: the resilient testing solution powered by the UiPath Business Automation Platform. Leverage production-grade, low-code automation and AI power tools to automate testing for any technology while still managing testing your way.

Sample Customers

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

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Telerik Test Studio vs. UiPath Test Suite

December 2024

Free Report: Telerik Test Studio vs. UiPath Test Suite

Find out what your peers are saying about Telerik Test Studio vs. UiPath Test Suite and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Telerik Test Studio vs. UiPath Test Suite 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.