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

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs UiPath Test Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 5, 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

IBM Rational Test Workbench
Ranking in API Testing Tools
16th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
30th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (19th)
UiPath Test Cloud
Ranking in API Testing Tools
7th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (6th), Test Management Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 1.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of UiPath Test Cloud is 3.3%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
UiPath Test Cloud3.3%
IBM Rational Test Workbench1.5%
Other95.2%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1513668 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Specialist, ITE at a government with 10,001+ employees
Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing
It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script.
SK
Senior Solutions Architect at a outsourcing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Integrates well and supports end-to-end workflows with API integration
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"Using service virtualization, we are able to accelerate the testing and development activity."
"All IBM testing tools are really well integrated."
"IBM Rational integrates the testing software as Rational Test Workbench, which is quite convenient and efficient as it is able to automate the test scripts."
"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"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."
"The Test Manager, the final stage of the UiPath Test Suite, is its most valuable feature."
"Test Suite has multiple tools that are fully integrated. It has everything you need to record your test cases, generate your documentation, and integrate synthetic data with your Orchestrator. I like the integrated aspect of it. The biggest advantage of UiPath is that it not only tests but also integrates with all the other services to offer a complete package."
"Being able to use regular expressions, activities, and attributes is valuable."
"It is a very scalable product."
"What I like most about UiPath Test Suite is that it's straightforward, and any user who knows how to use the UiPath Studio can learn how to create a test script in as fast as thirty minutes. There's nothing new you must learn to use UiPath Test Suite because it only has three sections: Given, Then, and When."
"The document understanding is good."
"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."
 

Cons

"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there."
"Rational Performance Tester supports cloud technology in the version 8.7, playing test scripts back on the cloud is not stable."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
"Implementing custom functions is bit tedious job, as ECMA script does not support some of the standard java-script functions, Also the Script editor window is not user friendly."
"We are able to automate most tasks by using UiPath. Its interface is fine. However, its price is a bit high."
"I don't rate its ability to automate very well."
"At FORWARD VI, we see new automations being built around AI and the ability to have developers understand how they can drive some of those AI capabilities with Studio. We are starting to see that. They should also drive that with UiPath Test Suite so that we can not only build that development side faster; we can also develop the tests that go along with it, hopefully automatically."
"Storing the test scripts is what needs to improve in the UiPath Test Suite, as it's currently a challenge to some extent. Maintaining the files is a bit challenging, especially when you need to keep those locally."
"Orchestrator is not easy to use or understand."
"The pricing isn't as low as other options."
"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."
"It would be very beneficial to do load testing with Test Suite."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."
"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."
"One robot license costs 1,500 euros."
"When we decided to buy the solution three and a half years ago, it was fairly priced."
"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."
"I don't necessarily have a problem with the pricing of the UiPath Test Suite, especially because we're using the testing bot licenses as opposed to the unattended licensing."
"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."
"I am not aware of the exact cost. It seems reasonable, but it is an additional cost."
"Regarding the pricing model, I believe it would be beneficial to combine it with some of the other platform aspects."
"UiPath Test Suite is a cost-effective solution. Orchestrator is the most expensive UiPath module, costing around $20,000, but you don't need to purchase Orchestrator to use Test Suite. You can buy a nonproductive version that costs about $2,400. It's a better value than other products I've seen."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
24%
Construction Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Non Profit
7%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for UiPath Test Suite?
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 p...
What needs improvement with UiPath Test Suite?
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 wh...
What is your primary use case for UiPath Test Suite?
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 a...
 

Also Known As

Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server
Test Suite
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Financial Insurance Management Corp.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. UiPath Test Cloud and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.