Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

BrowserStack vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

BrowserStack
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 7.5%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 1.8%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
BrowserStack7.5%
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web1.8%
Other90.7%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

CR
Test Software Development Engineer at uShip, Inc.
Streamlined testing experience with valuable features but high costs prompt a look into alternatives
In terms of improvements, they can make it snappier. Everything kind of works. They have locked down the phones, which is problematic because there are some test cases that require access to things that they don't give you access to, which is understandable. However, being able to have more granular access to the OS would be a good feature. BrowserStack is very expensive and they keep increasing their cost, which is absolutely ridiculous, especially when someone like LambdaTest is coming through for literal thousands of dollars less, with the same services. The amount of what LambdaTest has to offer for their price point seems to be a better financial choice for any company at this point. I haven't used LambdaTest yet; we are exploring options with other providers at this time, and LambdaTest has been the only one that's provided any kind of cost-saving benefit while not losing any of the functionality that we expect to have with these products. BrowserStack is really expensive, which is super annoying. Anytime you want something new, it costs an exorbitant amount. We just attempted to increase our seats and they wanted almost double what we were paying, which was insane because it wasn't double the seats. Companies need to make money, but they also need to work with their customers because otherwise, they'll lose them to competitors like LambdaTest who offer similar services for significantly less.
reviewer2356440 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Experienced ease in automation with strong support while seeking improvements in low-code options
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web offers flexibility of deployment, from on-premises to UFT One which is on the cloud. They provide capability for immediate deployment, and assets can be migrated easily. They include enablers specifically for quick migration of test assets. While I have not personally been involved in these migrations, I have observed some clients using it directly while others make a complete shift from OpenText to Tricentis platforms. There have not been many clients moving from OpenText platforms from on-premises to cloud because most shifts have been toward different product categories such as Tricentis altogether.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."
"BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization primarily through time savings because it is very easy to use and replicates physical devices for testing, which is crucial since we usually do not have physical devices."
"Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."
"BrowserStack positively impacts my organization by saving time in the QA testing process and clarifying the mission, which is important."
"BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization primarily through time savings because it is very easy to use and replicates physical devices for testing, which is crucial since we usually do not have physical devices."
"I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience."
"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."
"BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by ensuring that we don't have any surprises, especially on smaller devices."
"The ease of use and being able to enroll more people into developing test scripts using their AI function, which they call AI but is OCR recognition, is significant."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
"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."
"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 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."
"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"The product is easy to use."
 

Cons

"One improvement I observe is that iOS automation is not feasible due to some configuration issues, although it serves as a great tool for cross-browser testing."
"One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines."
"My review rating for BrowserStack is seven out of ten."
"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."
"BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"I think a possible improvement for BrowserStack could be adding features such as sending SMS or making FaceTime calls because, as far as I know, those features are not available at the moment."
"OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web could benefit from implementing a low-code, no-code solution that aids in quick automation code preparation."
"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."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
"The price of BrowserStack is high."
"The price is fine."
"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."
"The product could be more affordable."
"While the pricing may seem relatively high, when compared to competitors, it often falls in line or can even be more cost-effective."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
University
5%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Non Profit
10%
Performing Arts
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?
The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.
What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
Improvements for BrowserStack could include better usability when working under a private network or a VPN, since it can be challenging to access restricted URLs. There are times when running an au...
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.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
Digital Lab is a pretty solid product with areas that could be continuously improved on.
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
I deal with OpenText Analysis Database and Core Performance Engineering, which are categories of software rather than individual pieces. We focus on the ADM area, which includes ALM, UFT One, UFT D...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.