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

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs UiPath Test Cloud comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Digital.ai Continuous Testing
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
16th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (2nd)
UiPath Test Cloud
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
4th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (8th), Test Management Tools (6th), API Testing Tools (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Continuous Testing is 1.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of UiPath Test Cloud is 3.0%, down from 4.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
UiPath Test Cloud3.0%
Digital.ai Continuous Testing1.5%
Other95.5%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Mampi Bhattacharya - PeerSpot reviewer
Developer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Continuous testing has accelerated daily releases and now provides faster, richer debugging insights
Digital.ai Continuous Testing could be better in certain areas, and I can share my experience-based view on what can be frustrating. One issue is device availability and queue delays during peak CI hours. Sometimes devices are busy, causing tests to queue and the pipeline to slow down unexpectedly, which is especially painful for large regression suites or tight release timelines. Improvements are needed in smarter auto-scaling of device pools and better priority-based scheduling. Additionally, execution speed variability occurs; the same test sometimes runs fast and sometimes slow, depending on device load and network latency, making results less predictable. More stable execution environments and better performance isolation per session would help. Furthermore, debugging can still be indirect; even with logs or videos, I do not fully control the device as I would with local debugging, making it hard to pause and inspect live states or reproduce edge-case issues locally. More interactive debugging and improved local reproduction tools are necessary. Cost versus usage efficiency is another area of concern, as device cloud usage can be expensive and we sometimes have idle or inefficient tests that waste money. Improvements in usage analytics and cost optimization suggestions for smart test selection to run only impacted tests are areas where I believe Digital.ai Continuous Testing could improve.
CL
Senior Manager | Robotics & Data Sciences at Viacom Inc.
Efficient application testing with reduced maintenance, though integration enhancements are needed
The best features I've seen with UiPath Test Cloud so far come down to test case management, tracking, and the ability to see results, but I'll be honest, the main feature I enjoy the most is the cost. The ability of the test suite to automate tests across a wide range of technologies is great since UiPath's background in RPA is specifically designed to automate basically any and all technologies. UiPath Test Cloud has certainly helped me reduce maintenance. While I don't have a good calculation on the exact time saved, I can tell you it helps with maintenance significantly. It absolutely frees up staff time for other projects by quickly identifying and classifying issues instead of going through a manual triage process. The total cost of testing is indeed reduced with UiPath Test Cloud, probably targeting around a 25% to 30% reduction in cost, typically ending up closer to 15% to 20% for larger implementations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Digital.ai Continuous Testing has had a very positive impact in terms of efficiency and quality."
"The most useful feature for me is Mobile Studio. It has a UI where I can click on elements, and it generates a script for me. Mobile Studio can generate code from testing steps. I'm using Python with it."
"Digital.ai Continuous Testing has had a pretty positive impact on the organization, especially in terms of speed and reliability."
"Digital.ai Continuous Testing has positively impacted my organization with massive reductions in testing time, enabling us to cut our regression cycle from two to three days down to two to three hours, transition from weekly releases to nearly daily deployments, and reduce production defects by 30 to 50% while significantly improving debugging efficiency and overall team productivity."
"I have seen a clear positive ROI after implementing Digital.ai Continuous Testing, especially in terms of time saving, faster release cycle, and improved efficiency."
"Experitest is one of the only companies to offer a real device on the cloud to perform testing, and they also provide quality documentations that help you navigate and maximize the solution."
"The most valuable part of Experitest is the number of real devices on which the test is run."
"It's useful for automating tasks."
"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."
"Test Manager is helpful for tracking process steps. We can see which step is failing."
"UiPath's most valuable features are reusability and low-code aspects. It works across both desktop and web applications."
"The document understanding is good."
"UiPath Test Cloud definitely helps free up time for other projects for our engineers."
"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."
"The console, in a single pane, allows us to understand where we are in the testing environment."
 

Cons

"The amount of time that I have spent on just figuring out how to use Experitest and get it to work was quite long compared to what I have been doing before."
"Device availability and queue delays during peak CI hours are an issue; sometimes devices are busy, causing tests to queue and the pipeline to slow down unexpectedly, which is especially painful for large regression suites or tight release timelines."
"Digital.ai Continuous Testing is a strong platform, but there are a few areas where it could be improved to make the experience even better."
"I have been automating tests for many years on many things but not on mobile devices. The amount of time that I have spent on just figuring out how to use Experitest and get it to work was quite long compared to what I have been doing before. I spent the first two weeks just getting it started. It would be good to have some video explanation of how to use it on your devices and get started. Their online documentation is quite good and extensive, but it would be quite good to have some end-to-end examples demonstrated."
"The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version."
"One challenge is that the initial setup and integration with CI/CD pipelines can sometimes be a bit complex, especially for teams new to automation."
"Digital.ai Continuous Testing is a solid tool, but there are a few things that can be frustrating at times."
"I would also like to see more videos and descriptions that could make installation more efficient."
"The reporting could be improved. Often, we need to email a report to higher management, we can directly get the report from there. Also, the error reporting could be better."
"There is room for improvement in terms of introducing framework compatibility."
"The speed could be improved. I've noticed that adding more users impacts the speed, although nothing stops entirely."
"More precise logging would be appreciated."
"The initial setup of UiPath Test Cloud is a mixed bag; while setting up the tool is easy, building the tests is always tedious."
"UiPath could further enhance its functionality by simplifying the test case creation process within Test Suite."
"We have output arguments in the workflow. We can check results only by using those arguments. It would be better to have some more options, such as screen variables. For example, in a workflow, if we want to check if an activity is present inside, we should be able to get the output to UiPath Test Suite through the activity itself. That would be great for testing."
"If I publish a test case in Test Manager as well as in Orchestrator, the existing test case does not get replaced. It is appending the test case but not replacing it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We make monthly payments. The cost is dependent on the number of devices we intend to support."
"The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker."
"It is quite fairly priced, but it really depends on your budget. It is somewhere in the mid-range of products. It is not free and it is not QGP that nearly costs a whole house. You pay for the number of users who require access to execute the tests."
"When we decided to buy the solution three and a half years ago, it was fairly priced."
"Its price is a bit high."
"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."
"Regarding the pricing model, I believe it would be beneficial to combine it with some of the other platform aspects."
"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."
"One robot license costs 1,500 euros."
"It represents good value for the investment."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
22%
University
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Retailer
6%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
Digital.ai Continuous Testing is a solid tool, but there are a few things that can be frustrating at times. One thing I noticed is that the initial setup and configuration can feel complex, especia...
What is your primary use case for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
The main use case for Digital.ai Continuous Testing has been automating test execution as part of the CI/CD pipeline, especially for ensuring builds are stable before the release. For example, I us...
What advice do you have for others considering Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
If someone is considering using Digital.ai Continuous Testing, my advice would be to start with a clear workflow in mind. From my experience, it works best when you use it as part of a CI/CD pipeli...
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

Experitest Seetest, Experitest
Test Suite
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Samsung, American Express, Barclays, China Mobile, Citi, Cisco, McAfee
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. UiPath Test Cloud and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.