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

IBM DevOps Test UI vs Qualibrate comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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

IBM DevOps Test UI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
26th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
12th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Qualibrate
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
33rd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
21st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (29th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 1.6%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualibrate is 1.4%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM DevOps Test UI1.6%
Qualibrate1.4%
Other97.0%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

HZ
Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada
Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support
The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework. The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run. The reason is that changes were made to how it works with the browser and the startup takes some time. Adjusting those changes to speed up the load time will improve the solution.
FD
Test Manager at a government with 10,001+ employees
Reduces our testing time significantly, enabling us to release more frequently
The most valuable feature is the way it works, the usability. From the first setup, the user interface is the most beautiful. It's very nice the way you can recover things and make it work. We use the solution’s Test Planning & test Execution Scheduling features, and they are very important. They are easy to work with. We use SAP Solution Manager, and Qualibrate works with it, enabling us to manage all our tests, taking them from Solution Manager directly into Qualibrate. Because everything we do is in SAP Solution Manager, we are now able to do test automatization, combined with Qualibrate. All the defects are available in SAP Solution Manager and all the changes will be in Qualibrate, immediately. From Qualibrate, we see whether tests are good or not. We can create a test-related incident in Solution Manager for those that are not good, and Test Suite in Solution Manager will notify the person who has to rebuild it. That works very nicely.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"It is 100% compatible with all sorts of database integrations and is compatible with all types of open source TFT-based applications, which makes it a great product to have."
"The technical support is good; at least their response time is good, and whenever we ask them for help regarding deployment customizations, custom code implementation, or other code needs, they heavily support us, assign us IT engineers who work alongside us helping with code-related issues, and stay until the problem is resolved."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester, which analyzes the changes in UI elements and allows me to automatically adapt and change my automation testing."
"Robust API provides quick turnaround for developers to understand and automate functional test case quickly."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"Before Qualibrate, we did a release in about three months, and the regression testing would take us about three weeks with 15 people; now, we do it in one night."
"If you look at it from an overall perspective, where you look at the time that we typically would spend on testing, then it is probably a bit more like 60 to 70 percent time savings."
"We do see the long-term value in terms of time savings and the stress it is going to alleviate for the team."
"The most valuable feature is that it's user-friendly."
"It is the principle functionality that we're leveraging, which really can be defined as recordings and playbacks. So, you record the scripts that you want to execute and you also want to be able to playback. So, these are the features that we are largely leveraging. There are flows and scenarios, and they are the design aspects that fit within the playback and the recording solution. For me, they are the core of Qualibrate, and that's what we're using."
"What Qualibrate makes very easy to do is to record a process flow. Within five minutes you have a clear document produced by Qualibrate. Instead of using Word, and copying and pasting pictures into it from printscreens, within five minutes what you have was easy to make and it's easy for users to use."
"With Qualibrate, when we looked at the time and resources we are saving it was €1.5 million per year, mostly because of the move away from manual testing."
"Overall, we are really happy with it."
 

Cons

"It does not fully justify being a paid tool, and it needs improvement."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"If in the future there is no support for mobile applications, then we will be using it less."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."
"If you look at today's current context, I wouldn't recommend RFT because there are far more advanced solutions and products available."
"The object repository used for identifying objects can be made better. It has been noticed that the RFT tool is unable to identify some objects, due to which we are unable to add them to the object repository."
"We had an issue with SAP when using PDF forms. That was something that was not supported by Qualibrate, but we solved that issue by choosing another solution."
"Not everything in SAP works well with Qualibrate. There is a development tool called xpath and you have to program it. We always thought it wouldn't be necessary to program it with Qualibrate, that everything could be solved by Qualibrate without programming, but you have to program some things. Using xpath is more complicated, and not easy for everybody. It would be helpful if there were a no-code solution for this."
"What could be improved would be the intuitiveness of the reporting engine. It does have reporting, i.e., a dashboard, but it is preconfigured, predefined KPIs and datasets. That could be improved because the datasets don't have descriptions, so you really need to know what you're doing. Whereas, it would be great if it could have more descriptions and be easy to build your own KPIs."
"What I would really like to see is if you are running scripts in Qualibrate, and there is a defect, then you can have it automatically raise a defect in your own ticketing system."
"Their support has been quite good overall, but there have been some frustrations recently where we just feel like we're not always being heard."
"What I would really like to see is if you are running scripts in Qualibrate, and there is a defect, then you can have it automatically raise a defect in your own ticketing system."
"Not everything in SAP works well with Qualibrate."
"What could be improved would be the intuitiveness of the reporting engine."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."
"Automated testing is not cheap. But other companies, for example, Panaya, required a minimum of 10 licenses. Qualibrate allowed us to start small, with three licenses, with a price that was competitive within the market."
"We signed a three-year contract and the pricing is in line with our expectations."
"I compared the prices of the 15 solutions we looked at. Qualibrate was the most valuable because it could be integrated with SAP Solution Manager."
"We probably have 10 licenses, but I don't know what are the costs or anything like that."
"Qualibrate is realistically priced. I can't compare it because I haven't looked at other tools, but I think it is good. What I like is you can simply add new users, if you want. It has a license model that comes with different types of users, which I think makes sense."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise5
No data available
 

Also Known As

IBM Rational Functional Tester
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Edumate
AirFrance KLM, Provincie Noord Holland, Ministerie van Defensie, Nouryon, Bell Helicopter, Textron,
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Qualibrate and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.