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

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs Visual Studio Test Professional comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 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

OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (5th)
Visual Studio Test Professi...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
9th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 2.1%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Visual Studio Test Professional is 2.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Visual Studio Test Professional2.2%
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web2.1%
Other95.7%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Has reduced the need for scripting knowledge and enabled broader test script creation
The ease of use and zero cost are what I appreciate most about this product. The key for us is their Digital Lab service. With Digital Lab service, you have no control over those devices; you are simply getting an iOS device and using it as it is. Many of our customers are using InTune and other deployment services that have security settings on them. OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web allows us to test with our customers' setup of their device and ensure that the scripts will run against it versus a cloud service that does not have any of their security sizing and cannot truly mimic a real-life scenario. The overall framework of UFT in general helps reduce manual testing efforts for us. The ease of use and being able to enroll more people into developing test scripts using their AI function, which they call AI but is OCR recognition, is significant. By being able to develop scripts that way, you prevent having to know VB script. I have testers who create manual scripts and are already running the test manually; now they can perform that same effort in UFT One, and it creates the scripts so they do not have to recreate them every time. We do use the product's API integrations at some customers, though I am not as familiar with it as some of my colleagues are. My understanding is that for free, you can set up virtual APIs that do not exist yet, allowing you to mimic that behavior even before your APIs have been built. That is a huge selling feature and a significant zero-cost feature in being able to run your API tests even before the API is finished.
Payel Saha - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Automation Architect at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Integrated collaboration with automated test management has improved our agile workflows and continuously supports quality reporting
Visual Studio Test Professional could be improved as earlier we had flexibility in automation testing with TFS, which became a bit difficult moving to Azure DevOps. Additionally, in Visual Studio Code, we have an agent mode for GitHub Copilot, which is very helpful in testing or development phases, while Visual Studio's GitHub Copilot is a bit tricky and sometimes does not provide my desired output.For future improvements, I would like to see prompt fixing, as currently, if something goes wrong in Visual Studio, the fixing options are not always correct. If that intelligence is embedded, it would be very helpful.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."
"The ease of use and being able to enroll more people into developing test scripts using their AI function, which they call AI but is OCR recognition, is significant."
"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"ROI is definitely present with OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web; these are very capable tools, and there is no reason ROI should be a challenge."
"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."
"We escalate tickets to HPE, and we don't have problems."
"The pricing is great."
"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."
"The interface is easy to use."
"It is a very common and strong product, and a lot of support is available for this product."
"Visual Studio is highly powerful. It's probably the best software development tool on the market."
"The stability is great, I trust in the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the in-built support for C# and .NET projects."
"The product is very easy to use and we were able to scale up the automation solution quickly which was beneficial."
"Visual Studio Test Professional's most valuable feature is the rich IDE for doing code and test development."
"The documentation is easy, and it helps us solve our problems."
 

Cons

"I don't think the product as it is right now is going to sell itself, but it's really what are the next steps."
"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."
"Digital Lab is a pretty solid product with areas that could be continuously improved on."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"It's complex, and you need more skills than in most implementations."
"I think the biggest issues that I've seen, and this is a personal view of mine, is that most of the HPE products have a common look and feel to them."
"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."
"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."
"It needs more integration with other tools for monitoring. Microsoft also needs to make it more modern to make it work with microservices and the cloud. It is a bit outdated currently."
"Enhancing the support for web application testing and load performance would be an improvement."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a little pricey."
"Sometimes, the solution hangs, so its performance could be improved."
"There are some bugs, and sometimes it runs very slowly, but nothing that is major."
"The solution should be cheaper."
"Visual Studio Test Professional needs to improve its scalability."
 

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."
"The pricing is expensive."
"The product is very expensive."
"There are two versions of Visual Studio Test Professional: Community and Professional. We are currently using the Community version, but if we start working on a commercial product, we will consider upgrading to the Professional version. We need to identify how we will proceed with our projects, and based on that, we will decide on our licensing."
"It is a price-effective solution"
"There is a paid version of the solution as well as a community version that is free."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is not an expensive solution."
"The tool is expensive in my region."
"The tool is affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Non Profit
8%
Construction Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise25
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Visual Studio Test Professional?
The tool is free, resulting in no costs associated with its use. The absence of price makes it cost-effective.
What needs improvement with Visual Studio Test Professional?
Visual Studio Test Professional could be improved as earlier we had flexibility in automation testing with TFS, which became a bit difficult moving to Azure DevOps. Additionally, in Visual Studio C...
What is your primary use case for Visual Studio Test Professional?
We are using Microsoft Visual Studio for automation testing, specifically using C# Selenium.Visual Studio Test Case Management, which is embedded in Azure DevOps itself, is part of our process. We ...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Transport for Greater Manchester, Ordina, Bluegarden A/S, CLEAResult, Jet.com, OSIsoft, Australian Taxation Office, BookedOut, Tracasa
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. Visual Studio Test Professional and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.