OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs ReadyAPI comparison

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI

Download the complete report

Helped 893,221 peers since 2012

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

OpenText Functional Testing...

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

18th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (6th)

ReadyAPI

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

15th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 2.0%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 1.9%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
ReadyAPI	1.9%
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web	2.0%
Other	96.1%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

reviewer2356440

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.

Read full review

PrashanthKumar

Lead QA Engineer at Msys Technologies

Experience effective testing with flexible licensing alongside pivotal insights on essential improvements

For non-functional testing, I focus on performance and security. For performance and security tests, I used REST API, SoapUI, and JMeter. These tools help us conduct thorough testing across these dimensions. I find ReadyAPI helpful especially in overcoming security issues, as we experienced slowness in the application after merging our JAR files. For instance, if a person wants to access a university database and encounters a timeout error, we learned through ReadyAPI that the issue was due to HTML protocol limits with the payload. We fine-tuned this process to display the expected data effectively. I consider ReadyAPI a cost-effective solution because it covers three verticals without needing to purchase separate tools for security, performance, or functional testing. ReadyAPI is a versatile tool for creating multiple testing frameworks and validating various parameters seamlessly. REST API is the tool I use to test all three types of articles, meaning I validate the APIs I send to my peers or clients for functional testing, and I also perform security testing to ensure the URL and data passed through multiple components adhere to policies and user privileges. This is done through functional security testing using the REST API tool, and for performance, I ensure that applications can be accessed simultaneously by multiple users without hindrance or slowness through thorough performance testing.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This helped my prior organization immensely due to the ability to remotely manipulate devices, even by offshore vendors."

"Using the existing enterprise tools, like UFT, or even if you want to go open source, you can use them and it's a real user-functional performance, we are able to achieve that."

"The solution provides a controlled device farm with the right devices (selected based on analytics), that are readily available (can be reserved), have the right app and can be used for manual or automated tests."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."

"We escalate tickets to HPE, and we don't have problems."

"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."

"They've all been really satisfied with the scalability of the HPE products."

"This is a solution that's easy to use and it also gives us the possibility to use real devices connected either on the Mobile Center server or on our own computers and it works with both iOS and Android devices."

More OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web pros

"It's easy to learn how to use it."

"With this solution, we have achieved a fifty-percent gain when it comes to writing test cases."

"I would recommend ReadyAPI to others because it's user-friendly and can handle enterprise-level API testing needs."

"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the scripting tools and the connectivity to external data sources, such as Excel and PDF files. There are plenty of useful features that are useful, such as automating flexibility and usability. Overall, the solution is easy to use."

"ReadyAPI's best features are that it's user-friendly and its behavior-driven development is flexible."

"The interface is ok and they have the ability to re-load tests so that you can reuse them."

"The great thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a wide variety of functions."

"A single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and service actualization."

Cons

"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."

"However, in some cases we discovered some issues for HPE support regarding the latest enhancements; the delivery time for these enhancements is not as fast as we would like."

"With versions prior to 2.0 I found that configuration was trickier than it should be, particularly with aspects such as NV."

"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."

"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."

"Because of connection errors, we've haven't yet been able to set it up properly at my company."

"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."

"However, it is still a young product that is improving leaps and bounds each release."

More OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web cons

"Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions."

"The solution is made up of multiple tools, and the one additional feature we'd like to have is load testing."

"Lacking flexibility of adding more custom verification for security testing."

"It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today."

"The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved."

"ReadyAPI is not fully integrated with all system ecosystem tests."

"The reporting is not very robust and needs to be improved."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."

"If I remember correctly, ReadyAPI costs between $5,000 to $7,000 for five thousand virtual users running it at a given point in time. Other tools, for example, Apache JMeter, can run millions of users at a given time. ReadyAPI is a tool that requires you to pay more money if you want more users to run it for performance testing. For functional testing, each ReadyAPI license costs $1,000, and you do get basic testing, and it's inclusive of one hundred users. In my company, if there's a need for more than one hundred users, my team uses Apache JMeter because it's futile to end up paying $5,000 or $6,000 annually just for performance testing, which can be done in Apache JMeter as well. Given the circumstances, my team does performance testing only towards the end of the fiscal year when the regulatory testing of applications takes place. If I have to run ReadyAPI just for two days or just for ten or fifteen odd days, then it's not worth paying $5,000 for the license with the small number of users provided by ReadyAPI."

"The thing with ReadyAPI is that you have to buy different licenses for different purposes."

"We use fixed licenses, and the last time I checked, I want to say it's around $680 per seat per year."

"We have approximately 12 licenses in place. There are other solutions that are more expensive than ReadyAPI that have more features, but if the scope of the project is limited to SOAP and REST service, then this is the best option."

"The price of the solution has been fine."

"We pay $3,000 annually for a floating license. actually. That allows another person from my company to use it as well. It's a cloud-based license."

"The price was around $6,000 for one license, but I don't remember exactly. It is definitely expensive. Our organization was planning on having multiple licenses for this year."

"It is expensive. Each user needs to be licensed, and there are different licenses within the product. It starts with 750 euros for a single user per year, but for the full product features, you need to pay a lot more. There are three versions. This cost is for functional testing, and then there is a cost for load testing and virtual services. If you want to use these areas with the functional test license, you are limited. You hit some limits in these functions. If you have all three licenses, then you have full functionality for the API."

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

10%

Construction Company

Non Profit

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Outsourcing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	13

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	28

Questions from the Community

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...

What advice do you have for others considering Micro Focus UFT Mobile?

I do have experience with OpenText products and OpenText ALM. I have been using ALM Quality Center, which has had a few names for it over time, but it is the old Quality Center that was then rename...

What do you like most about ReadyAPI?

The performance testing capabilities are very good.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI?

Currently, we don't extensively use the performance testing due to license costs. License prices can be a factor in considering which technologies to adopt.

What needs improvement with ReadyAPI?

One issue I found with ReadyAPI is related to event listeners compared to JMeter or SoapUI. We created an in-house dashboard to display automation runs across projects, which required manual updati...

Perfecto vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Comparisons

Compared 7% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 5% of the time

Sauce Labs vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 5% of the time

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web Competitors

Apache JMeter vs ReadyAPI

Compared 8% of the time

Parasoft SOAtest vs ReadyAPI

Compared 7% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs ReadyAPI

Compared 7% of the time

ReadyAPI Test vs ReadyAPI

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs ReadyAPI

Compared 4% of the time

Product Reports

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web

Download OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web product report

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web report

ReadyAPI

Download ReadyAPI product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center

Ready API

Overview

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web offers integration with HPE and non-HPE tools, real device testing, and device management. It supports real-time analytics and multi-platform testing, ensuring traceability and flexibility with decentralized devices.

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is designed to enhance testing efficiency for mobile and desktop applications by allowing ease of integration with different testing environments. It features real-time analytics, supports automated device management, and provides the flexibility of decentralized testing on real devices. With a focus on robust traceability, it stands out as a comprehensive choice for optimizing software development life cycles, especially notable for its ability to support multiple devices simultaneously and strategic scaling through network virtualization and AWS device farm.

What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing Lab?

Ease of Use: Intuitive interface facilitating user engagement.
Integration: Compatible with HPE and non-HPE tools for improved workflow.
Real Device Testing: Ensures testing on actual devices for accurate results.
Automation: Advanced capabilities streamline repetitive testing.
Device Management: Flexible management of decentralized devices.
Multi-Platform Support: Simultaneous testing across various platforms.
Traceability: Strong application delivery traceability for robust tracking.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Scalability: Ability to handle multiple devices and scale as needed.
Flexibility: Deployment options include both on-premises and cloud-based solutions.
Real-Time Analytics: Provides actionable insights for data-driven decisions.
Enhanced Performance: Optimizes the software development lifecycle.
Comprehensive Testing: Facilitates thorough functional and performance testing.

Financial services companies utilize OpenText Functional Testing Lab for optimizing mobile solutions and applications, ensuring a streamlined integration into their Application Lifecycle Management and Unified Functional Testing processes. It aids in functional and performance testing, adapting to both on-premises and cloud deployments to suit industry-specific demands.

OpenText

ReadyAPI stands out for its API testing capabilities and integration with development tools like Jira and Git. Its user-friendly interface and automation with Groovy scripting make it a suitable, efficient choice for developers aiming for seamless project management and test execution.

ReadyAPI presents a comprehensive suite for API testing, supporting functional, performance, and security tasks with minimal coding required. It offers robust integration with tools such as Postman and CI/CD processes, enabling users to manage and automate testing scenarios efficiently. Despite its strengths, users notice limitations in performance and cloud integration, especially in scalability and test management. While it facilitates data-driven testing through Excel and supports on-premise and cloud environments, ReadyAPI could benefit from improved reporting and simpler scripting processes. Its interface and GitHub integration would further enhance its adaptability for larger projects and diverse applications.

What are ReadyAPI's main features?

Smart Assertion: Simplifies API validation with efficient testing mechanisms.
Drag-and-Drop Functionality: Enhances ease of use and streamlines workflow.
Groovy Scripting Automation: Allows for advanced automation without extensive coding.
Data-Driven Testing: Utilizes Excel files for managing test scenarios effectively.
CI/CD Integration: Ensures smooth project management and test execution across development cycles.

Why consider ReadyAPI in your evaluations?

Testing Efficiency: Reduces coding requirements, allowing for rapid test case development and validation.
Tool Integration: Seamless compatibility with platforms like Jira and Postman boosts workflow.
Cost-Effective: Offers a versatile toolset for developers without excessive expenditure.
Reporting Options: Provides comprehensive insights to refine testing outcomes and strategies.

ReadyAPI is principally leveraged by industries that require precise API testing capabilities, spanning functional, performance, and security assessments. Its ease of integrating with CI/CD tools and ability to manage backend APIs make it an ideal choice in sectors that prioritize automation and reliability in testing processes. Companies operating within on-premise and cloud environments benefit from its support for diverse testing needs and scenarios, ensuring improved testing proficiency and response validation.

SmartBear

Sample Customers

Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB

Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI