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

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs ReadyAPI Test 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)
ReadyAPI Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
21st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (10th), API Testing Tools (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 2.0%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 2.3%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web2.0%
ReadyAPI Test2.3%
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.
Luis Sanchez - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Quality Assurance Test Engineer at Dormakaba
Helps in data, regression, performance, security, and functional testing
ReadyAPI Test needs to improve its reporting. While reports provide essential information when issues arise, or tests fail, having more graphical representations directly within the reports would be beneficial. It needs to improve stability and scalability as well. The tool's support is slow, and takes months to reach a solution.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We escalate tickets to HPE, and we don't have problems."
"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 pricing is great."
"We evaluated other mobile testing solutions and found this to be superior to all of them."
"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 main benefit is that you can get a very quick idea regarding the performance of your application, and it also helps you discover hidden pain points that you would not have found without using this tool."
"They've all been really satisfied with the scalability of the HPE products."
"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 user-friendly."
"The utmost importance lies in the performance of the application."
"The out-of-the-box support for the database is a valuable feature."
"The ability to analyse and simulate web services are clearly the main value."
"The solution scales well."
"SoapUI is very useful; before we started using SoapUI, we had to do everything manually, which is very time-consuming, and there were a few things we couldn't validate, but using SoapUI made everything easier, you can do six to seven hours of work efficiently, and it's more flexible to use."
"API mockups, functional testing, and load testing are valuable features."
"For the money this is a great tool."
 

Cons

"I think the interface is not very good and I have used other solutions that are easier to learn."
"It's complex, and you need more skills than in most implementations."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"With versions prior to 2.0 I found that configuration was trickier than it should be, particularly with aspects such as NV."
"Because of connection errors, we've haven't yet been able to set it up properly at my company."
"I have not been able to use this tool a lot of time, so I don't consider myself in a position to say what can really be improved."
"I am not really a fan of the Ready Pro version even though I am sure it offers a lot."
"Grouping of the cases is not possible in SoapUI, to my knowledge. When working with critical cases or the, we were not able to group them properly. We can definitely create a suite and add them there, but within a whole suite, we have to identify them, which was not easy."
"I think their user-information sites should be better defined by SoapUI. For example, if I want to hit that virtualize server, let's say, with a 100K load — what is the bare minimum requirement?"
"Better integration capabiliites with a range of Test Management Systems (not that it is not possible using the API) where a range of aspects are considered such as housing of the project, sharing (some capabilities here), versioning of projects, automatic saving of run information and results (again this can be done in test suite setup but would be great to view in a test management system)."
"The UI should be improved a little."
"I find that I'm fighting with the opportunities to order requests."
"The licenses could be more flexible with regards to floating licenses."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 product could be more affordable."
"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."
"The cost is not that bad."
"SoapUI Pro is open source but it has a subscription-based model which involves some more features. At the moment we are using the free version. The Pro version requires a license, and it is an annual license to use it."
"My understanding is that the pricing is okay, however, that's taken care of by our procurement team. It's around $5,000 for three years."
"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."
"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."
"We have team members who are working in shifts, and it is not possible for us to utilize a single license on a single piece of hardware so that multiple team members can use it. We have to take out multiple licenses for each team member."
"It is free of charge."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
11%
Non Profit
7%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Construction Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

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 Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise20
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
SoapUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Apple, Cisco, FedEx, eBay, Microsoft, MasterCard, Pfizer, Nike, Oracle, Volvo, Lufthansa, Disney, HP, Intel, U.S. Air Force, Schindler
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs. ReadyAPI Test and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.