No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs Inflectra Rapise comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 15, 2026

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

Digital.ai Continuous Testing
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
10th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (3rd), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (3rd)
Inflectra Rapise
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
25th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Robotic Process Automation (RPA) (38th), AI Quality Assurance (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Continuous Testing is 1.4%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Inflectra Rapise is 1.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Digital.ai Continuous Testing1.4%
Inflectra Rapise1.5%
Other97.1%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Mampi Bhattacharya - PeerSpot reviewer
Developer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Continuous testing has accelerated daily releases and now provides faster, richer debugging insights
Digital.ai Continuous Testing could be better in certain areas, and I can share my experience-based view on what can be frustrating. One issue is device availability and queue delays during peak CI hours. Sometimes devices are busy, causing tests to queue and the pipeline to slow down unexpectedly, which is especially painful for large regression suites or tight release timelines. Improvements are needed in smarter auto-scaling of device pools and better priority-based scheduling. Additionally, execution speed variability occurs; the same test sometimes runs fast and sometimes slow, depending on device load and network latency, making results less predictable. More stable execution environments and better performance isolation per session would help. Furthermore, debugging can still be indirect; even with logs or videos, I do not fully control the device as I would with local debugging, making it hard to pause and inspect live states or reproduce edge-case issues locally. More interactive debugging and improved local reproduction tools are necessary. Cost versus usage efficiency is another area of concern, as device cloud usage can be expensive and we sometimes have idle or inefficient tests that waste money. Improvements in usage analytics and cost optimization suggestions for smart test selection to run only impacted tests are areas where I believe Digital.ai Continuous Testing could improve.
WIllWorley - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Consultant at The New Humanitarian
The tool needs to improve in the areas of security, though it is a versatile product
Inflectra Rapise needs to expand its ability. I spoke with Inflectra's executive account rep on the need to expand the tool's ability. The problem with Inflectra Rapise is that a lot of companies are still using SAP GUI. Inflectra has no intention of building Rapise in a way that allows it to interact with SAP GUI. Inflectra Rapise has very limited value for the companies I work with because they they still use SAP GUI since their top priority is SAP testing, and they want to get into automation, for which they need a tool that cannot only used to automate processes, but can also do end-to-end testing where you are not only using SAP GUI, but you are using the interface with old legacy systems that are still in use or with today's more modern technologies. In the future, the tool needs to increase its versatility. If I am at a company that uses 23 different technologies, like .NET Visual Basic, Oracle, SQL, or whatever, Inflectra Rapise needs to be made as a product that is an out-of-the-box usable tool for any technology.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Digital.ai Continuous Testing has had a pretty positive impact on the organization, especially in terms of speed and reliability."
"Digital.ai Continuous Testing has had a very positive impact in terms of efficiency and quality."
"The most useful feature for me is Mobile Studio. It has a UI where I can click on elements, and it generates a script for me. Mobile Studio can generate code from testing steps. I'm using Python with it."
"Experitest is one of the only companies to offer a real device on the cloud to perform testing, and they also provide quality documentations that help you navigate and maximize the solution."
"The most valuable part of Experitest is the number of real devices on which the test is run."
"Digital.ai Continuous Testing has positively impacted my organization with massive reductions in testing time, enabling us to cut our regression cycle from two to three days down to two to three hours, transition from weekly releases to nearly daily deployments, and reduce production defects by 30 to 50% while significantly improving debugging efficiency and overall team productivity."
"I have seen a clear positive ROI after implementing Digital.ai Continuous Testing, especially in terms of time saving, faster release cycle, and improved efficiency."
"We saved thousands of dollars because the Rapise implementation gave us 30 or more executions for every release compared to three or four, so huge savings on manual testing effort plus easy detection of defects is very cost effective."
"The first time I used Rapise I completed the automation scripts for a full application in a day and I was shocked how easy it was."
"The initial setup was straightforward; it wasn't complex at all, and we found it nice and easy."
"It's pretty straightforward to set up."
"Rapise is a good automation tool that's easy to use and learn, and you can share scripts as a team, which is very helpful."
"The scripting of this tool is easy and user friendly."
"We always use the product for end-to-end automation test cases."
"It's incredible but the support and maintenance of Inflectra Rapise's scripts is less than 30% of the effort that was involved in maintaining Selenium, it is very easy and this is the reason that we are switching everything that needs handling from Selenium to Inflectra Rapise, as it is easy to maintain and provides a benefit in cost and efforts with a 90% reduction factor in the maintenance of the scripts."
 

Cons

"Digital.ai Continuous Testing is a solid tool, but there are a few things that can be frustrating at times."
"Digital.ai Continuous Testing is a strong platform, but there are a few areas where it could be improved to make the experience even better."
"The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version."
"I have been automating tests for many years on many things but not on mobile devices. The amount of time that I have spent on just figuring out how to use Experitest and get it to work was quite long compared to what I have been doing before. I spent the first two weeks just getting it started. It would be good to have some video explanation of how to use it on your devices and get started. Their online documentation is quite good and extensive, but it would be quite good to have some end-to-end examples demonstrated."
"I would also like to see more videos and descriptions that could make installation more efficient."
"One challenge is that the initial setup and integration with CI/CD pipelines can sometimes be a bit complex, especially for teams new to automation."
"I believe that it could be more stable. During times when something is not working, it is difficult to find the solution."
"Device availability and queue delays during peak CI hours are an issue; sometimes devices are busy, causing tests to queue and the pipeline to slow down unexpectedly, which is especially painful for large regression suites or tight release timelines."
"The maintenance is very difficult."
"It would be good if there could be more integration of Inflectra Rapise, since not all customers use the same tool for test management and automation integration."
"Inflectra Rapise needs to expand its ability."
"It has some stability issues where the tool crashes sometimes on Windows 10."
"When there are failures in a nightly run of batches of scripts, it can create a blocking situation where all the following scripts will fail due to unexpected results."
"I faced one problem where it can't validate the colour of images and text. Also, it could not automate the mobile app, and this needs to be included."
"The maintenance is very difficult. We've only been using the platform for three months, so I'm not sure if that will continue, but right now it's an observation I've had."
"What I have noticed about Rapise is that sometimes when you keep on using the same script, it fails many times."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker."
"It is quite fairly priced, but it really depends on your budget. It is somewhere in the mid-range of products. It is not free and it is not QGP that nearly costs a whole house. You pay for the number of users who require access to execute the tests."
"We make monthly payments. The cost is dependent on the number of devices we intend to support."
"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where ten means very good pricing."
"We pay no more than $50 annually for support of each one of the licenses."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
University
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
18%
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker.
What needs improvement with Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
Digital.ai Continuous Testing is a solid tool, but there are a few things that can be frustrating at times. One thing I noticed is that the initial setup and configuration can feel complex, especia...
What is your primary use case for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
The main use case for Digital.ai Continuous Testing has been automating test execution as part of the CI/CD pipeline, especially for ensuring builds are stable before the release. For example, I us...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Experitest Seetest, Experitest
Rapise
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Samsung, American Express, Barclays, China Mobile, Citi, Cisco, McAfee
- Soflab - RegEd - Intel - US Government
Find out what your peers are saying about Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. Inflectra Rapise and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.