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

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs TestObject comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 Mobile App Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (10th), AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (3rd)
TestObject
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
10.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Mobile App Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Continuous Testing is 5.8%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TestObject is 2.2%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile App Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Digital.ai Continuous Testing5.8%
TestObject2.2%
Other92.0%
Mobile App Testing 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.
RajeevSAwant - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Automation CoE at Truglobal
Low-code testing platform used for API and visual testing as well as AI-based scriptless automation
This solution is very easy to use and this is one of the solutions best features. It has integrated seamlessly with our framework and provides very wide coverage. It offers very comprehensive reporting and allows us to drill down to the various levels of the automation and respective application performance. What TestObject provides is not available from other service providers. The kind of detailed reporting provided is very good.

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."
"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."
"Digital.ai Continuous Testing has had a very positive impact in terms of efficiency and quality."
"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."
"Experitest is one of the only companies to offer a real device on the cloud to perform testing. 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."
"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."
"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."
"This solution is very easy to use and this is one of the solutions best features."
"TestObject have released new capabilities that have helped us to provide a comprehensive solution to our end customers. Customers do not need to provide upfront investment in mobile devices as these are pretty costly."
 

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."
"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 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 believe that it could be more stable. During times when something is not working, it is difficult to find the solution."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"In a future release, we would like to have the ARML model included."
"In a future release, we would like to have the ARML model included."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We make monthly payments. The cost is dependent on the number of devices we intend to support."
"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."
"The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
University
17%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
No data available
 

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
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Samsung, American Express, Barclays, China Mobile, Citi, Cisco, McAfee
BW Bank, Telefonica
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Digital.ai and others in Mobile App Testing Tools. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.