UiPath Test Cloud Reviews

My use case for this product is specific to a high-profile project within the life sciences domain, where I am involved in the transportation of critical emergency medications that get prescribed and sent to hospitals. It includes medical devices and nuclear health functionalities, focusing on the integration testing of all these devices. The backend operates via APIs and the performance of these APIs is crucial, along with the essential data to execute tests. The end-to-end API integration testing is my primary focus in this area.

I work predominantly in healthcare and life sciences now, but I also have expertise in finance that spans many years.

It has had a positive impact on my organization as it has received positive feedback and is recommended to multiple clients, facilitating automation across various domains and clients.

Some of the best features I find with UiPath Test Cloud include the creation of end-to-end workflows with API integration, which was particularly useful for my use case, allowing me to connect APIs seamlessly within the defined workflows in UiPath. 

Its integration is easy. It integrates very well.

The speed could be improved. I've noticed that adding more users impacts the speed, although nothing stops entirely. The speed for each transaction might be slower, but I cannot pinpoint exactly where the lag occurs in the process.

I have dealt with UiPath Test Cloud for 14 to 15 months.

It is stable.

It is scalable, and we are planning to scale starting in 2026.

I would rate UiPath's support neutrally at a five; while they do provide support, it can take time to receive responses.

Neutral

I deal with various tools including UiPath Test Cloud, Sauce Labs, Postman, and the latest feature, Copilot, so I use everything. A lot of tools are involved.

There is a significant difference between Sauce Labs and UiPath Test Cloud; while Sauce Labs offers automation capabilities, the differentiating factor is test coverage. UiPath Test Cloud hits a higher percentage of test cases per lines of code, which means it may cover 7,000 lines in automated tests from 10,000, as opposed to 3,000-4,000 lines with Sauce Labs in a similar scenario. Sauce Labs is less expensive than some of the other tools, and while UiPath Test Cloud has become much better and easier to use than in the past, Sauce Labs was initially user-friendly, but now UiPath Test Cloud has improved significantly from its earlier, more complicated interface.

I am involved in the initial setup and, being in the industry for over 24 years, I find it straightforward. However, I recognize that there has been complexity for junior and senior team members trying to access it. Better documentation or dedicated support can help resolve that. Personally, I'm comfortable using any tool.

We have recorded about a 27% to 30% time saving, but our goal is to achieve about 60% savings in the near future.

We have started using Agentic AI, and there are currently some proof of concepts (POCs) in progress. The primary problem statement that I am trying to address with Agentic AI automation is about external dependencies. To put it simply, how can we solve the issue of external dependencies with Agentic AI.That's the goal. How do we create contracts dynamically for resources that are not readily available? That's the question we're trying to answer.

Reducing maintenance is one of the main goals, and while tools have the capability to reduce it, the challenge is that not everyone using the tool has the same level of familiarity. 

I would rate UiPath Test Cloud a nine out of ten.

I use all of the functionalities including Process Mining, Document Understanding, and UiPath Test Cloud, as we're a full-stack user. With UiPath Test Cloud, we are focusing specifically on application testing, seeing it as a differentiator in the market compared to existing test software applications, and the main area where we see a lot of highly effective use cases is in the SAP arena, where standard deploy, customizable modules, and large teams of support typically interact with big ERP and CRM applications, yielding a lot of success. UiPath Test Cloud has helped automate major applications such as SAP and Oracle, which are significant needle movers, particularly in a project we did where a customer was migrating from on-prem to cloud for SAP, allowing us to regression test hyper-fast while rolling out new modules and automating at the same time.

The best features I've seen with UiPath Test Cloud so far come down to test case management, tracking, and the ability to see results, but I'll be honest, the main feature I enjoy the most is the cost. The ability of the test suite to automate tests across a wide range of technologies is great since UiPath's background in RPA is specifically designed to automate basically any and all technologies.

UiPath Test Cloud has certainly helped me reduce maintenance. While I don't have a good calculation on the exact time saved, I can tell you it helps with maintenance significantly. It absolutely frees up staff time for other projects by quickly identifying and classifying issues instead of going through a manual triage process. The total cost of testing is indeed reduced with UiPath Test Cloud, probably targeting around a 25% to 30% reduction in cost, typically ending up closer to 15% to 20% for larger implementations.

It's tough for me to say how UiPath Test Cloud could be improved due to my lack of experience with the other test tools, but I'd venture a guess that there might be better integrations within those test softwares with tools such as Jira and Atlassian, and potentially better test case management.

I have dealt with UiPath for seven years now, starting to use them back at EY, and I have interacted with them extensively over that time.

UiPath Test Cloud is very stable, and I can unequivocally say that.

Its scalability is good.

I haven't used a specific previous automated testing solution, but I have worked with different tools for testing, none of which I would consider competitors to the current UiPath tool.

The initial setup of UiPath Test Cloud is a mixed bag; while setting up the tool is easy, building the tests is always tedious.

I work in a cross-industry capacity with this product. I work for an enterprise company, and these are all enterprise clients who I believe are spending millions of dollars on the software each year, not just on UiPath but on the software we are testing. We use a combination of deployment models; we have done on-prem, hybrid cloud, and public cloud, with a trend towards more hybrid and full public cloud configurations. We typically use whatever cloud provider UiPath is using, sometimes opting for the provider's offerings, but we rarely provide our own cloud services specifically for the Test Cloud suite. While some newer AI testing software might appear to be one, two, or three in terms of list price, their true costs could be much higher due to potential failures.

I rate UiPath Test Cloud a seven; it's a solid, really good tool that does exactly what it claims for the price it sets, though I foresee a potential drop to a five or six due to new entrants offering better value, keeping in mind that maintaining their current capabilities without raising prices can be challenging.

I worked on a project for a bank that involved mortgage facilities for leasing motor vehicles. Clients approach the bank for financing, providing details about their needs. The process is divided into groups, with each group handling specific tasks. I implemented UiPath test cases to simulate the process, including customer registration, bank response, mortgage eligibility, and more. These test cases are executed in a long-running fashion and are currently operational.

In UiPath Test Suite, we create test cases in Studio and then publish them to Orchestrator. The publishing process allows us to disable unnecessary test cases, reducing the overall project size. After publishing, test cases are organized into Test Suites in Orchestrator. These suites can be executed in batches, allowing for daily testing and monitoring.

The Test Suite manager in Orchestrator provides a dashboard with a pie chart showing test case success and failure rates. This tool helps analyze test results and identify areas for improvement. While the Test Suite manager is primarily for checking and inspection, it also allows for editing, reading, and running test cases.

By dividing large processes into smaller parts, UiPath Test Suite becomes a valuable tool for testing and quality assurance.

UiPath Test Suite has helped automate various applications, including Microsoft Office, web applications, Citrix environments, and PDF documents. I used Microsoft Office primarily for the bank to send and receive client emails. For web testing, I employed JavaScript-based web applications. For Citrix automation, I executed tasks like logging in, logging out, and navigating to Java-based applications within the Citrix environment. Additionally, I incorporated PDF automation into application loops. Beyond these, I utilized Microsoft Active Directory to retrieve recipient names, such as customer names, within the Citrix environment. This involved recalling and obtaining the customer retail ID in a loop.

If I create a process in RE Framework within UiPath, which is typically used for complex processes, I find it beneficial for large-scale applications, especially in banking. Previously used for smaller processes, RE Framework now excels at breaking down complex processes into stages. In UiPath Test Suite, we can easily move the steps from our RE Framework process into tasks or test cases. While the RE Framework is larger, it offers a structured approach, making it ideal for processes that require frequent updates due to market changes, which often occur in the banking domain.

The UiPath Test Suite Manager in Orchestrator provides a dedicated dashboard for tracking and analyzing process success rates. This eliminates the need for end users to contact developers or team leads for status updates. By accessing the dashboard through the Orchestrator tenant URL, users can easily view the success rate for their processes and identify any failed steps or exceptions. This saves time and facilitates long-term process reviews and performance analysis.

In my experience, when we work in the office, we utilize a Microsoft Azure dashboard if the company has the license to track incidents and tasks. Daily, we review these items on the dashboard. UiPath Test Suite is a valuable tool that allows us to pre-categorize and plan our work. For instance, a large project might be divided into three-month phases, with the first month dedicated to creating test cases. This structured approach helps streamline our daily tasks. Additionally, UiPath's reusable components can significantly reduce development time. While the Azure dashboard is essential for daily task management, UiPath Test Suite provides a more strategic overview, ensuring our efforts align with the project's timeline. This saves us 75 percent of the time.

UiPath Test Suite integrates seamlessly with other solutions like ServiceNow and Microsoft Azure. ServiceNow primarily handles incident management. While UI automation might not be ideal for end-users in this context, API integration provides a more effective solution. To integrate with ServiceNow, I used a dedicated API endpoint, which I received with credentials. I employed Postman as a manual step to verify the correct retrieval of API data. Unlike the UI-based details in ServiceNow, API integration directly accesses backend data. I also integrated with Microsoft Azure using API calls for most applications. Similarly, integrating UiPath Test Suite with AI and ML solutions often relies on API calls.

As a success metric, I'm unsure how to present this best. Each month, we report on test case execution. Given a specific number of test cases, we track the bot's execution time. If a test case takes longer than expected, we investigate ways to optimize it. This is a regular process. While I'm not directly involved in development, I understand that UiPath's default execution time is 30 seconds, but actual times may vary. By running tests repeatedly, we can determine the actual time and identify areas for improvement. We aim to reduce complexity by addressing technical, application, and business exceptions. When presenting to clients, we demonstrate how we've reduced test case execution time from, for example, ten seconds to five or even two seconds. This is a crucial indicator of our success.

We swiftly recognize the advantages of the UiPath Test Suite. If we're executing a business process in Orchestrator, similar to how we run Test Suite, the latter operates in sets. For example, considering mortgage as a process name would encompass ten test cases. Once we align this process with our modern folder and proceed to the test tools, aligning and running it ensures all test cases are grouped under a single test set. This allows for immediate results, minimizing the time required. It will depend on our coding approach and development methodology. UI-based processes might take longer, while background automation generally requires less time. Within half an hour, we can anticipate receiving the answer. In fact, for minimal processes, results can be obtained within seconds.

UiPath's data management features provide a convenient way to store and manage credentials, files, and data. Credentials are securely stored in the UiPath storage bucket and can be accessed by the orchestrator as needed. This eliminates the need for large-scale data storage solutions like OneDrive or Gmail Drive. Additionally, data management allows us to upload and store various file types, including Excel, text, and credential-based files. For output data, we can leverage the orchestrator queue to track and manage its status. While Excel and queues are commonly used, we can also store data in shared paths or as standard text files or credentials files. In summary, UiPath offers a cloud-based storage solution, along with queue management, to efficiently handle data storage and management within our automation processes.

Recently, I completed an automation project using RPA to create a coded workflow. I entered a prompt into UiPath Autopilot, which automatically generated all necessary tests in the studio as coded elements using AI. I then executed and tested these tests, significantly reducing the time required for manual processes. By becoming proficient in prompt engineering and refining our approach, we can streamline automation and achieve greater efficiency.

The Test Manager, the final stage of the UiPath Test Suite, is its most valuable feature. It allows users, even those with read-only access, to directly monitor the performance of test cases, including their success and failure rates. This is crucial for end-users and for showcasing the average success rate to stakeholders in board meetings. The Test Manager is essential for performing these tasks and processes efficiently.

UiPath Test Suite, a feature within Orchestrator, is a useful tool for testing automation processes. However, accessing the full functionality of the Test Suite manager, including the dashboard, requires a tenant license. This can be a barrier for users without technical expertise.

While the community version offers free features like document understanding API calls, the Test Suite also provides limited free access to user community support. Still, access should be expanded as it can be crucial for learning and understanding the tool.

Regarding framework comparison, the RE framework in UiPath offers a structured template for process automation, including exception handling. However, the Test Suite framework needs similar exception-handling capabilities. This can require additional customization for effective application handling.

I have been using UiPath Test Suite for over two years.

UiPath Test Suite's stability is rated seven out of ten due to occasional performance issues in the cloud. While test cases created in the studio function well, deployment to the cloud can sometimes result in slow UiPath server responses or application loading problems. This can hinder immediate monitoring of success and failure rates, requiring manual refreshes and causing delays. Although maintenance is frequently performed, these issues can arise at any time, leading to a lower stability rating.

Several key differences emerge when comparing Selenium, UiPath Test Suite, Power Automate, and Automation Anywhere. While UiPath Test Suite provides a comprehensive framework with features like exception handling, RE framework, and try-catch blocks, Power Automate offers a more fundamental approach with limited templates. Automation Anywhere also lacks a desktop application and focuses solely on cloud-based automation. UiPath's orchestrator functionality and cloud-based Studio with machine learning capabilities also set it apart from the others. Ultimately, UiPath's broader feature set and versatility make it a more powerful tool for automation compared to its competitors.

The deployment process is straightforward. The UiPath documentation website offers detailed instructions on how to use the UiPath Test Suite. All features and steps are clearly outlined on this website. If we have the necessary license, we can review the steps and follow the team's guidance.

Configuring UiPath Test Suite typically takes one to two hours, depending on the developer's experience. As I am familiar with the setup process, I anticipate it will be quick. I will use a template, create a test case, publish it to the orchestrator, verify and align the process, review the test case, execute it, and monitor its progress. While this is a simple task, understanding the steps is crucial. Fortunately, the UiPath documentation provides valuable guidance.

The UiPath license portal provides a dedicated space for managing licenses. All licenses originate from FlexTitle. For each license, such as those in the Test Suite or Action Center, there is a specific API call or number indicating the license count. Compared to other vendors, UiPath is known for its higher cost. However, this investment grants organizations a comprehensive environment for implementation. UiPath offers cloud and desktop features that are not currently available with competitors like Automation Anywhere or Power Automate. While these competitors may expand their offerings in the future, UiPath currently provides a more complete solution.

The cost of a UiPath Test Suite license for five users is over $10,000 USD. We must purchase a license based on the number of users in our organization.

I would rate UiPath Test Suite nine out of ten.

As a support person in the UiPath environment, I've noticed that license expiration often triggers advanced email notifications, prompting password changes or license updates within specific timelines. Troubleshooting these issues revolves around effective communication, as automation must be handled in collaboration. It's essential to prioritize checking these aspects regularly. For business exceptions, I personally investigate any missed steps. However, application exceptions like URL errors or website crashes require application-level troubleshooting. I often attempt multiple approaches, but business exceptions typically necessitate personal intervention. Reporting is a crucial method for troubleshooting all issues. If UiPath or its Studio crashes, system maintenance, such as repairing or reinstalling the application with a refreshed license, can resolve the problem. I've encountered these troubleshooting challenges, and this approach has proven effective.

I have primarily used the community version for the past six and a half years. However, I am aware that my organization uses the older paid version. For example, the enterprise version I used in my previous organization was 2022.10, while the community version is 2024.10 and later. Although the community version offers daily updates, there is a risk that features I implement may be modified in the future, leading to potential exceptions. For general tasks like running and testing, the community version is ideal. Therefore, I mainly use the community version for personal purposes but prefer the enterprise version for end-user applications.

From a maintenance perspective, maintenance is the developer's responsibility. Their primary responsibility is to check the number of failed and successful tests. However, as an application exception, if a UiPath Test Suite Manager is not configured, the developer must report this to the tenant and request that the feature be enabled before it can be used.

If a company is cost-conscious, it should consider alternative vendor applications like Automation Anywhere, Power Automate, or Kofax. These options are generally less expensive than UiPath Test Suite, especially for organizations with fewer than 500 employees. For example, UiPath licenses can start at around $2,300 USD, while Microsoft Power Automate can be obtained for as little as $230 USD.

To effectively automate with UiPath, a foundational understanding of coding structures is essential. This knowledge empowers users to navigate the automation process more efficiently. With a solid coding base, learning UiPath may be easier. My personal experience, having started UiPath automation immediately after graduating, confirms the importance of coding skills. Many individuals without coding experience find automation jobs less appealing, focusing solely on tool usage. Therefore, I recommend prioritizing the development of coding skills before delving into automation. This approach ensures a more fulfilling experience and opens doors to other technical roles, such as data engineering or data analysis, for those with a strong coding background.

I have been developing automations with UiPath Test Suite for about three years. In my role as a solution architect, I make sure test automation is integral to every project I handle.

What I really like about UiPath Test Suite is its ability to ensure that any changes made do not affect other functionalities. Its automated execution when a different package changes and using different test cases defined in an Excel file are particularly useful. Test automation allows me to manage complex processes without overloading servers. It integrates well with other processes.

There is room for improvement in terms of introducing framework compatibility. Many companies use test automation as an alternative to Selenium but need to develop a fully functional bot in UiPath to test on it, which is inefficient. UiPath should introduce compatibility so existing processes in Selenium or other tools can work seamlessly with UiPath Test automation.

I started implementing UiPath Test Suite around three years ago.

UiPath Test Suite has matured over the years and is now quite stable. Many organizations use it for automating test cases, demonstrating its reliability. Initially, it had issues, including minor errors, however, these have been resolved, and it is now a stable option for test automation.

The solution is fairly scalable, and I would rate it nine out of ten. Proper knowledge of Orchestrator and CI/CD processes makes the product truly scalable. Although not primarily needed for test automation, scalability in terms of running multiple tasks simultaneously is manageable.

I would rate customer service and support eight out of ten. While the support provided is good, it is frustrating to pay extra for support plans. It should be free, especially for product-related issues.

Positive

I work with clients who often use different solutions. For simple web applications, Selenium might be a better choice as it can sometimes be free. However, for complex scenarios involving extensive UI recognition, UiPath Test Suite is preferable if licenses are available.

The initial setup is moderately complex. For basic test automation, it is straightforward. However, using the testing dashboard of Orchestrator can require a bit of training, and it's not as simple as just picking up and running with it.

The pricing of UiPath tends to be on the higher side, which can restrict smaller companies from adopting it. Although justified by the solution's capability, excessive costs should not be necessary for support.

Selenium is often considered due to its ease of use and lack of cost when running basic tests on local machines.

The overall rating I give to UiPath Test Suite is seven out of ten. The licensing model limits broader adoption by smaller companies despite its features. I recommend UiPath for medium to large enterprises that require extensive testing and can afford its licenses. 

Additionally, employing automation engineers to replace manual testing could be highly beneficial.

We are a service provider, so we utilize UiPath Test Cloud to deliver the service to our clients. Our use case for UiPath Test Cloud involves mobile testing, specifically for a client's mobile application. We automate whatever users do in the mobile app, and it is used for mobile testing.

The impact of UiPath Test Cloud on our project has been positive. The client already had UiPath licenses for RPA work and some automated processes. By suggesting the use of UiPath Test Cloud, the benefit they received was that they don't need separate licenses.

UiPath Test Cloud definitely helps free up time for other projects for our engineers. It can reduce time by up to 40%. It allows SMEs to focus on new areas such as enhancements.

UiPath Test Cloud has definitely helped reduce the total cost of testing for our customers through cost optimization and stable automation.

UiPath Test Cloud supports a wide range of technologies. So far, we have done mobile, web, and some database querying. We have created scripts to search the database and get the data, which fits into UiPath's data services, a dynamic test data library. Instead of hardcoding anything in the script, we refer to the data from the data services, which is inbuilt, so we don't need any external data source such as Excel files or SQL databases.

The most valuable feature of UiPath Test Cloud that I have found is the TestManager dashboard, which integrates with Jira through Planview Tasktop. This allows us to create different suites in TestManager, schedule them, and integrate them with CI/CD.

They can improve the dashboard by adding some widgets for reporting. Also, currently, they don't have defect management modules. If they could add defect management, it could work independently without needing Jira.

I have been working with UiPath Test Cloud for six months now.

I would rate the stability of UiPath Test Cloud as a nine because it is a mature product. It is performing better than two to three years back; significant improvements have been made for complete project delivery.

I would rate the scalability of UiPath Test Cloud as a ten out ten. It has bots that can be scheduled, and all test cases can be run on these bots, allowing automation developers to be separate.

Scaling with UiPath Test Cloud is supported; they have the infrastructure to scale automation to meet business needs.

I would rate the technical support for UiPath Test Cloud as a ten out of ten. When we raise a ticket, they support us within three days. They get into the meeting, understand the problem, and try to provide a solution quickly.

Positive

The initial setup is of medium complexity because multiple components are involved, so setting up and integrating them is a little challenging and requires some support.

I consider it expensive. I would rate it a seven out of ten for pricing. 

It's priced per license on an annual basis. Our customers usually pay around 30K to 35K for five licenses, which is priced per year.

We conducted a small PoC with UiPath Test Cloud, and I have previous experience using it as a test automation tool, which helped. After performing the two-week PoC, we advised the client to go for it.

We have integrated UiPath Test Cloud with Jenkins, but we haven't used anything else for integration so far.

It supports the page object model, allowing the creation of small reusable components that facilitate building test scripts across three applications. I would recommend following the approach of building small modular test cases as workflows and creating the test cases using those small workflows.

UiPath Test Cloud does not have self-healing features, but I see that it is very stable. The approach we followed was creating small reusable components, making maintenance comparatively easy. We have implemented a page object model.

Overall, I would rate UiPath Test Cloud a seven out of ten.

I am currently working on API automation for a SAP application. We work on the processes for the finance team and the supply chain team. We mostly focus on test cases and test management. 

Test Manager is helpful for tracking process steps. We can see which step is failing. There is automation, test management, continuous integration, and continuous deployment.

We also have test reports, orchestrator integration, UiPath Studio, API testing, test execution, performance testing, and unit testing. These are the useful features available in UiPath Test Suite.

I discovered a lot of bugs in UiPath Test Suite. If I publish a test case in Test Manager as well as in Orchestrator, the existing test case does not get replaced. It is appending the test case but not replacing it. We want to replace the existing test case, but this functionality is not available. 

In Test Manager, there are a lot of defects in the ROI report that we provide to the operations team on a monthly basis. It is not very clear and detailed. There is no detailed explanation of every test case. There is only a high-level overview. We cannot download the report from Test Manager. We have to use some other tool, such as Power BI, to view the data.

I have worked with UiPath Test Suite for one year and eight months.

I would rate it a nine out of ten for stability.

It is 100% scalable. I have no concerns about its scalability.

In my current project, we have six people. Three people are working in a different domain and the other three people, including me and the other two developers, are working in a different domain. There are six developers working. Overall, in the entire team, we have 18 people.

Before UiPath, we used QA tools like Selenium. UiPath has more functionalities as compared to Selenium. In Selenium, we cannot track the status. UiPath has a web-based interface. It is user-friendly. It is easy to track the status and get reports. UiPath supports all kinds of applications, whereas Selenium supports a limited number of applications.

It is on-prem as well as on the cloud. I have worked with both setups. Its deployment is straightforward.

When it comes to processes, a small process takes two to three days to deploy to Test Manager and Orchestrator. If you have a mid-level process, it can take two weeks. If you have a high-level process, it can take four weeks.

When you have multiple test cases, you have to track the version. It is not very difficult, but you have to do it on your own.

In our environment, we have three people for the development and deployment of processes. Each person has to complete 50 processes. The developer is also responsible for deployment in production and support. We have a virtual machine environment to deploy Test Suite applications. 

One of the processes saves us about 150 hours monthly. The time saved varies from process to process, but we would have saved at least 1,050 hours yearly. Per week, it saves us about 25 hours. The cost savings also vary depending on the process.

It is a little bit more expensive than Selenium, but it provides value for money. 

There are multiple types of licenses such as the Test Suite license, Studio Pro license, Test Manager license, and Test Robot license. The overall cost estimation is 13,800 dollars.

We follow a specific process in our organization. In the planning stage, we do requirement analysis and test strategy planning. After that, we do the detailed documentation of the process. We then go to the design stage where we do the test case design and data preparation. After that, we move to the development stage. We have two types of development. One is the development of automation, and the other one is for version control or how to control the automation. We have multiple test cases. For each process, we can control the versions. The next step is the execution. It includes test execution and environment execution. The next stage is monitoring and reporting. There is real-time monitoring and reporting. The next stage is defect management, where we log or track any defects and resolve them. We have continuous integration and continuous deployment. After the deployment of a process to the production environment, we have to track the process. There is regression testing and integration testing. Finally, we do test case maintenance and test data management. There is a continuous optimization and feedback loop. The operations team gives the reports on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis. The operations team provides these things.

Once a process is published in the production environment, the developer has the responsibility of the production environment. If any of the bots fail in the production environment, they need to be fixed within the time frame applicable to the severity. It can be done within two to eight hours. High-priority issues have to be resolved as soon as possible. A mid-priority process can take up to eight hours, and a low-priority one can take 24 hours.

If you do not have any prior experience working with APIs, it can be difficult to do API automation with UiPath Test Suite.

I would recommend using it if you have processes that are done regularly. Otherwise, it is not required to use UiPath Test Suite.

I would rate UiPath Test Suite a nine out of ten.

Historically, we have used the UiPath Test Suite to perform regression testing during third-party web-hosted application upgrades. When a new version of our platform is released, we leverage the product to execute our standard test scenarios and verify the stability of the new release, ensuring that no existing workflows or integrations are negatively impacted.

UiPath Test Suite's versatility is a major advantage. It can be applied to a wide range of technologies, from web-based applications to desktop software, all within a single platform. This is in contrast to other solutions that might be more specialized for a single platform and require switching providers for testing on different ones. Having everything in one toolkit provides significant benefits, especially in terms of its adaptability to various use cases.

UiPath Test Suite helps free up staff for other projects. The biggest advantage is the significant reduction in manual regression and testing time. For us, this translates to being able to focus on higher-value activities, such as planning the rollout of new updates and assessing their impact on specific workflows or end users.

When used effectively, UiPath Test Suite can significantly reduce maintenance overhead. Testing often becomes a burdensome activity, but with test automation, organizations can achieve greater test coverage with less time and effort. This translates to gains on the maintenance side in several ways. Firstly, it allows for embedding more rigor and variety into the testing process efficiently, ensuring that only high-quality code is released into production. Secondly, it leads to fewer defects and more stable code, making it easier to maintain and reducing the need for frequent bug fixes or minor enhancements over time.

UiPath Test Suite helps us significantly reduce our overall testing costs. We've observed reductions in testing time ranging from 50 to 75 percent. This is the most significant benefit, considering the traditionally long testing cycles that are dramatically shortened thanks to the suite.

Two features of UiPath regression testing stand out to me. Firstly, the ability to schedule test runs just like any other UiPath automation. This is particularly helpful when we know the upgrade timeframe, as we can automate the regression testing alongside the deployment. Secondly, detailed logging is invaluable. When a test case fails, we can pinpoint the exact step(s) involved, both the failures and successes. This focused insight streamlines impact assessment and prioritizes issue resolution, allowing us to move forward swiftly.

UiPath could further enhance its functionality by simplifying the test case creation process within Test Suite. One way to achieve this is by leveraging AI to analyze existing workflows and automatically generate or recommend suitable test cases based on that analysis. I understand that UiPath is already working on solutions to convert requirements and test cases into automated testing scripts. However, for organizations with numerous pre-existing workflows, the ability to automatically analyze these workflows and generate corresponding test scenarios and cases would be invaluable in onboarding new use cases onto the platform.

I have been using the UiPath Test Suite for two years.

We have not had any stability issues with the UiPath Test Suite.

The ability of Test Suite to scale our automation significantly simplifies both its ongoing maintenance and support. Additionally, when we seek to enhance existing automation or expand the scope of a workflow, Test Suite accelerates the time to value by enabling us to navigate testing phases and gates more efficiently compared to manual testing.

Before implementing the UiPath Test Suite, we performed all our testing manually.

We initially deployed it on-prem and have since changed over and have it in the cloud environment.

The initial deployment was straightforward in terms of getting everything set up and activated for the Test Suite. There were three of us involved in the deployment and it took four to six weeks to complete.

Regarding the pricing model, I believe it would be beneficial to combine it with some of the other platform aspects. Currently, test robots seem to be separate from other robots and their associated license counts. This is something I recommend changing. Ideally, I would like to see a system where we can run development, non-production, and production robots in the same way. This would mean combining production and non-production run times, potentially including mock production and automated testing runs under the non-production umbrella.

I would rate UiPath Test Suite an eight out of ten.

We haven't yet explored integrating Test Suite with other lifecycle tools and applications, specifically in the context of code pipeline management tools. However, I believe it presents a truly exciting opportunity for the platform. Imagine seamlessly connecting Test Suite to platforms like Git or DevOps, where code repositories reside. Every time a new version or release of code or workflow is created, we could integrate it with Test Suite and a code pipeline tool. This would automatically trigger the execution of regression test scenarios and only allow code to be pushed if it passes all tests. This eliminates the need for extensive manual documentation and testing, thereby providing greater assurance of code quality while expediting code delivery.

We recognized the value of the UiPath Test Suite four weeks after its initial deployment. However, we needed to refine some of our existing scripts and test cases within the platform before we could achieve seamless execution and ensure the suite continued to perform as expected over time.

Our project-specific workflows require ongoing maintenance. This means that changes to the underlying systems could impact the execution of our automated test scripts. Consequently, we need to regularly update and maintain these scripts to ensure their continued effectiveness.

The key to effective testing lies in simplifying our objectives. Often, difficulties arise when we rely on subjective, poorly written test cases with unclear success criteria. Instead, focus on defining and simplifying objective criteria: so can we definitively tell if a workflow or test case is executing successfully. Once we have clear criteria, we can implement appropriate processes and automation to run the tests. For example, if the test generates a report, define the key aspects of that report that need to be verified to ensure it was not only generated but also generated accurately and contains all the correct and required information.

Preparing to implement a solution like Test Suite involves evaluating how existing testing and documentation are currently structured and determining if they need improvement. The key to this is ensuring test cases are written clearly, concisely, and repeatably. This means anyone on the team should be able to pick up a test case and understand exactly what needs to be done. If existing manual testing scenarios lack this level of detail, automating them will be very challenging.

We use the UiPath Test Suite to perform regression testing on the third-party vendor systems that we rely on. When a new update is received from the vendor or we make any configuration changes, the regression tests we created with UiPath Test Suite help identify any potential issues.

Automating our regression testing with Test Suite saves our QA Analysts many hours of testing whenever we receive vendor updates, or we make configuration changes. We receive vendor updates monthly and quarterly. QA analysts no longer need to perform end-to-end regression tests and can concentrate their manual testing efforts on testing the new functionality.

Our automated regression tests have found problems with new vendor releases almost immediately, while manual testing might have taken a couple of weeks to find the same issues. We are finding the issues faster so we can open tickets with the vendor, who can then fix them and send us a new release. Under manual testing, it could be a couple of weeks before we would find the bug, and then we would have to open a ticket, wait for the vendor to fix it, and then deploy the fix, which could delay the release to production. This way, as soon as the bug is found, we open a ticket with the vendor and then simply run the test again when they provide a new version.

The best thing about Test Suite and UiPath in general is that they are easy enough for business users to use. Our QA analysts, who are not technical, have been trained to use Test Suite to automate regression testing because the tool is easy enough for them to use. UiPath has excellent training resources, including free training resources on its website. As a result, we are no longer paying expensive developers to create the regression tests. Instead, the QA analysts can automate regression testing themselves.  

UiPath's tools are generally designed for business users, so they can be as simple or as complex as needed. Although the UiPath Task Capture tool is not part of the Test Suite, we use it to gather the steps that need to be performed for regression testing, so we have a clear picture of what needs to be done. Task Capture has been a great help for automated regression testing.

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. The QA Manager needs to track which tests have been completed, the success rate, and other relevant information. The ability to have manual tests show up in multiple projects is a requirement that is not easily done in Test Suite.

We have submitted the following enhancements request to UiPath and are waiting for them to address these issues before migrating our manual testing to the UiPath Test Suite platform.

• Ability to import manual test cases from an Excel Spreadsheet.




• Ability to create release folders and have manual tests under the folders (sub-folders are also needed).




• Ability to copy tests between projects (manual and automated).




• Ability to execute manual test cases in any order and skip tests if needed.




• Ability to assign and see who has been assigned to test cases – need to know who created the test case and who executed the test case as they could be different people.




• Ability for the QA manager to see which test cases have been run and which haven’t as well as which ones were successful, and which weren’t.




• Ability for the QA manager to track defect cycles for a particular release.




• Improving Search functionality – must enter the exact test case name in current search functionality.



• Ability to extract key data for artifacts for Release Management or Audit
  
  

  • Test Set or Individual Cases,

  
  

  • Include Test Results (passed / failed),

  
  

  • Include how many iterations a test case went through until it passed.

  
  
  
  

I have been using the UiPath Test Suite for three years.

UiPath’s technical support has been exceptional. They respond to my tickets in a timely manner, typically within 24 hours. If the problem is related to a lack of knowledge or training, they will provide knowledge-based articles to help me solve my problem. If the problem is more complex, they will ask for additional information or schedule a call to troubleshoot the issue.

Positive

We were using Ranorex Studio which required developers to both create and run the tests. This meant that whenever regression testing needed to be done, the QA team had to reach out to the developers. This was not very efficient. From a testing perspective, our QA analysts are the ones who are most familiar with the platforms we use. They understand how the platforms should work and what issues might arise. Therefore, when we switched to UiPath, we implemented a model where the QA analysts were responsible for creating and running the regression tests. This way, the QA analysts can automate tests and run them as needed. UiPath Test Suite enables us to use this model, so we do not need any formally trained developers to do automated testing for third-party vendors.

The initial setup of UiPath Test Suite was straightforward. All of UiPath's products are easy to set up. Once we paid for the license, it was activated in our version.  We configured Test Manager for the tenants we wanted to do regression testing in. There was a learning curve in that we had to learn how to use Test Manager, but overall, it was very simple and was done by one person.

The implementation was completed in-house.

I am not a fan of the UiPath licensing model which is used by the major vendors in the RPA space. I prefer a consumption-based model because it provides greater flexibility for trying new products offered by UiPath and allows us to only pay for the time an automation is running (process automation or automated tests).  Under the licensing model, I must purchase licenses upfront to handle the volume and need to purchase extra licenses to handle peaks in volume. These extra licenses are used to handle peaks, so the utilization of these licenses is low which makes them expensive to use.

UiPath Test Suite is a powerful tool for automated testing by non-technical QA analysts. However, its weaknesses in manual testing may make it unsuitable for having all testing (automated and manual) within one tool. We have adopted UiPath Test Suite for automated testing but continue to use Azure DevOps for manual testing. For teams that don’t have strict requirements for manual testing, UiPath Test Suite may be sufficient.  Our QA team finds the features lacking in UiPath Test Suite, but our Process Automation Team uses Test Suite for the manual testing of our automations.

It can be difficult to justify automated regression testing using traditional Cost Benefit Analysis (time and $ saved manually compared to automated) but in our case, finding issues with vendor releases earlier justifies the effort for creating automated regression tests. We are using Automation Hub to capture regression testing requests and compare the costs of manually running tests multiple times per month compared to automating the tests. Automation Hub provides a nice graphic showing the benefits which are supplemented with the intangible benefits of finding issues earlier.

UiPath Task Capture is a valuable tool for regression testing as it can provide the basis for the automated test. The tool allows you to generate a document with step-by-step instructions including screenshots as well as an XAML with a blueprint for the automation. I highly recommend using Task Capture for starting your regression tests.

Finally, I would recommend that you create a dashboard that indicates how many times regression testing found issues and report that to senior leadership to show the value that automated regression testing brings to the organization.

UiPath is used for a couple of workflow-related activities. We use it for onboarding and other HR tasks. When an employee comes to the organization, we use UiPath to validate their details or whether the employee ID has been created. After verification, it will trigger an email to the IT department to configure a desktop based on the employee category. Once it's approved, we close that ticket. We use it as a ticketing process checking mechanism. In a few areas, we are also using it for testing. We execute some of the test cases through UiPath. 

We use UiPath Test Suite to decrease the time to market, which means reducing the test cycle time and for attended execution. We had 10 to 15 people using it in the previous version, but now we only have three users at my current organization. 

UiPath Test Suite saves time by improving our efficiency. We generally run the scripts at night, and it auto-triggers at a specific time.  It's very fast compared with Selenium scripts. 

It requires a little bit less maintenance compared to Selenium. For example, suppose some scripts are failing due to object recognition. It takes more time to fix in Selenium than the hypothesis. In Selenium, I need to check the object and create it directly. With UiPath, everything is drag and drop. It takes five to 10 minutes to change some properties in Selenium, but I can do it in two or three minutes in UiPath. 

The solution reduces the cost. A functional test case takes about 10 to 15 minutes, but an automated test case takes five to seven after we develop the script. 

We can generate our own workflow. In our case, it is a report on the PDF file. In the reporting category, we generally verify a couple of things and generate a lot of reports at the end of the day. It provides some useful details about the data captured from the PDF that we can put into an Excel file.

It gives the test cases and other things up front, and everything is already defined. I don't need to write any test scripts. We only need to change the parameter. It will help to create our test cases. That increases productivity compared to our other tool Selenium. 

The UiPath Community is helpful for my day-to-day issues. When I have a problem, I can find an immediate solution in the community. The UiPath Academy lets anybody start using the solution after getting the basic training to understand. 

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.

I worked on an automation project from 2019 to 2022. I just joined a new company, so I'm training employees on UiPath and exploring the feasibility of using the tool in our current organization.

UiPath Test Suite is stable. 

I have a good impression of Test Suite's scalability, but I am not sure it will help every aspect of testing because I have not tested how UiPath handles end-to-end scenarios

I use multiple other automation tools. These can be grouped into two categories. One is a tool where we need to generate the code and scan every test code. There is also the low-code RPA. UiPath is suitable for that where we don't need to write scripts unless we need to customize something. Everything is mostly covered by the code generator. I have worked with Automation Anywhere. I thought that Automation Anywhere was heavy from a setup perspective and difficult to configure.

When we do our proofs of concept for tools and approve them. We calculated our return on investment. We generally calculate our RoI at the end of every month by comparing the number of times we automate scripts versus manual execution. I have 10 scripts, and I run them four times. I see the execution cost of running them manually and compare that to the cost after I have converted it to automation. We run those comparisons monthly. 

The time to value depends on the project and the number of cases you select for automation. If you have 50 test cases, two criteria would determine when you realize the benefits. One is the number of times you are executing per day or month. If you execute the scripts frequently, you will see a return on investment quickly. But if you run them only once a month, it will take time to see a return because you need to invest in development. If you are using your scripts more, it will become profitable faster.

I rate UiPath Test Suite nine out of 10. My advice to prospective UiPath users is to try the solution first. They need to understand what process they plan to automate, evaluate the impact, and whether it supports their objective 100 percent. If it supports the business goals but requires hidden maintenance costs, it is not good for them. My suggestion is to first identify the proper end-to-end scenario or test case. Then, do a proof of concept and evaluate whether it is fully compatible with their tool or process.

We use it to automate processes. For example, we can filter or fetch data from an Excel sheet and put it into another file. We can also scrape the data and put it into an Excel sheet or PDF.

We can integrate with multiple technologies such as Java, Python, etc. We can also automate with the Power BI tool. It supports different types of integrations. We are able to integrate with Jira, ServiceNow, etc.

It makes automation easy. To automate with Python or Java, we have to write a lot of code, which is not the case with UiPath. It is very easy to use.

I like the AI Center and Document Understanding features. I also like its interface and the ability to code.

It is user-friendly. The coding part is also fine. They have a portal for learning UiPath. 

It is feature-rich. It has more features than other RPA tools.

It already has many features. No improvement is required currently. We are able to automate most tasks by using UiPath. Its interface is fine. However, its price is a bit high.

I have been using this solution for two years.

It is stable. I would rate it an eight out of ten for stability.

It is scalable. I would rate it an eight out of ten for scalability.

We have 10 to 11 users working with UiPath.

We are also using other RPA tools such as Power Automate, Blue Prism, and Automation Anywhere. We use the latest technology to improve our automation.

We take the customer requirements and analyze them. Based on the requirements, we recommend the solution. We see whether what the client needs can be automated through UiPath or some other solution. Certain things cannot be automated through UiPath. Similarly, certain things cannot be automated through Blue Prism or Automation Anywhere.

With other RPA tools, no test suite is available, whereas with UiPath, you have UiPath Test Suite. With other RPA tools, you have to use Selenium or some other application for testing, whereas, with UiPath, you have UiPath Test Suite, so you can create your test cases.

It is deployed on the cloud. Its deployment is easy. It is not complex.

After we complete the development, we test it in our testing environment. After monitoring and ensuring that everything works fine, we move to the production environment. We create a ticket in ServiceNow with the change request and get approval from the higher authority for the move to the production environment. It takes us three to five days.

It requires some maintenance. 

Its price is a bit high. I would rate it an eight out of ten for pricing.

Most companies are using its licensed version. It has a lot of features such as Document Understanding, AI Center, etc. For simple automations, there is also a community version.

It is a very good solution. People can learn it easily. It is the best solution if you want to automate repetitive tasks and manual operations. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.