Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs ReadyAPI comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

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
17th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (4th)
ReadyAPI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 0.9%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 1.4%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Robinson Caiado - PeerSpot reviewer
Automates mobile solutions while boosting productivity and fostering innovation
It allows multiple devices to be used and gives flexibility in adding devices when a project is needed. Most of the time, I have several devices where it is predefined. We can use it, but sometimes, we must scale it in a particular situation. It's very flexible. It is very important because we can use a different approach to software testing, for example, to find a way to execute UFT software testing with only one execution. This reproduces all the platforms that we need.
Walter Wirch - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamless integration with cloud environments supports backend projects while seeking AWS Lambda enhancements
ReadyAPI enhances my workflows by allowing us to use Docker containers based on the ReadyAPI test runner. It helps extend our functional tests, even though we are not heavily using performance testing. It supports a wide range of protocols such as Kafka and GRPC, depending on the project. It also aids in faster feedback to developers, allowing them to implement developments in a sprint without the need for extensive testing afterwards, thus improving our time to market metrics.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"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."
"The product is easy to use."
"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."
"The solution is easy to use. There are features to orchestrate mobile testing, including mobile testing automation. You can test different devices at the same time."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
"The dashboards are very good and consolidate all of the tests that you are performing with the client."
"The initial setup of ReadyAPI is straightforward."
"For anyone who does not have experience with automation, ReadyAPI provides a sense of comfort, especially for testers who find it hard to go directly into coding."
"It has the ability to combine it with different CI/CD tools."
"It's easy to learn how to use it."
"ReadyAPI enhances my workflows by allowing us to use Docker containers based on the ReadyAPI test runner."
"It's easy to automate for more data-driven testing."
"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."
 

Cons

"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"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."
"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."
"OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web could benefit from implementing a low-code, no-code solution that aids in quick automation code preparation."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."
"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."
"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."
"There are lots of options within the solution, however they are not upfront or user-friendly."
"ReadyAPI could improve by having dynamic validation information."
"What needs improvement in ReadyAPI is its load testing feature because there was a hiccup when my team performed some load testing on the tool. My team had meetings with the ReadyAPI team and tried to get that issue fixed, but it still hasn't improved. This is a shortcoming of the tool, especially when you compare it with HP LoadRunner."
"I would like to see a better dashboard for monitoring in the next release of this solution."
"They have performance testing also. However, it's not that great."
"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."
"The UI is not user-friendly."
"Version control does not work well."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product could be more affordable."
"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."
"While the pricing may seem relatively high, when compared to competitors, it often falls in line or can even be more cost-effective."
"ReadyAPI is moderately priced, with added costs for more plugins."
"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."
"There are costs in addition to the licensing fee. For example, if you want to add the load testing you would pay more."
"For each license, they charge the same amount, which is less than $1,000 for each desktop license."
"The price of the solution has been fine."
"The thing with ReadyAPI is that you have to buy different licenses for different purposes."
"This is a cheap solution when you consider the money that will be saved in testing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
17%
Non Profit
10%
Educational Organization
5%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Insurance Company
10%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web could benefit from implementing a low-code, no-code solution that aids in quick automation code preparation. Additionally, from a strategic standp...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web can be used for a range of applications, not just web and mobile. It works very well for SAP, which is an enterprise platform. It can be used for ...
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...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.