We performed a comparison between UiPath Test Suite and Worksoft Certify based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's effective at testing whatever automation we've built or making sure the automation we've built is working fine."
"We also don't develop test robots like typing codes; we program them with drag-and-drop features."
"We can generate our own workflow. In our case, it is a report on the PDF file. In the reporting category, we generally verify a couple of things and generate a lot of reports at the end of the day. It provides some useful details about the data captured from the PDF that we can put into an Excel file."
"It's useful for automating tasks."
"In terms of integration with other lifecycle tools and applications, UiPath Test Suite works very well because of the basis of RPA, and how RPA and automation can handle different applications and different areas of expertise."
"The detailed logging is invaluable."
"We are finding bugs and defects much faster."
"The document understanding is good."
"For this SAP upgrade or implementation, the business users are creating building blocks in their areas, then they're changing the building blocks into long end-to-end scripts to do a complete end-to-end testing to speed up the UAT. It definitely has a bigger coverage of UAT testing."
"The most valuable feature is its time saving. Once development is complete, the short time that it takes to execute a test is invaluable. It saves a number of dollars and man-hours."
"What I found most valuable in Worksoft Certify is its identification feature. I also found its automation feature valuable."
"It is very easy to maintain. With scripts, I can change one line and in one step. Whatever I want, I can do. I don't need to be an expert to use it."
"The tool is easy to use. It is a drag and drop Microsoft type of solution."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automate quickly and to maintain and update scripts."
"It does allow for good reusability. When it's designed properly and utilized properly, we can put things in a way that allows for reusability, meaning a lot of reuse of VA01, if they're very similar flows, to keep it simple."
"One of the biggest advantages for this solution is codeless automation. Because it is codeless, you can train people within a couple of hours."
"We'd like to see the solution integrate with more code or local frameworks."
"UiPath could further enhance its functionality by simplifying the test case creation process within Test Suite."
"Orchestrator is not easy to use or understand."
"I don't rate its ability to automate very well."
"I'd like the solution to be even more automated."
"They could improve the visualization of the product."
"We are facing problems specifically with Desk Manager."
"At FORWARD VI, we see new automations being built around AI and the ability to have developers understand how they can drive some of those AI capabilities with Studio. We are starting to see that. They should also drive that with UiPath Test Suite so that we can not only build that development side faster; we can also develop the tests that go along with it, hopefully automatically."
"It is very easy to use, but there are some places where they need to improve their security. E.g., the BPP tool is just a URL, which does not ask you for a username and password. Anyone can login and can see it."
"I am aware that they have some challenges with some of their support resources, especially offshore which is very common. I don't think this is specifically a Worksoft issue. It always seems to be a software issue, and I know that Worksoft is aware of this and they are trying to make some improvements."
"Web UI testing was difficult in the beginning, as we had a homegrown product, and we had to do the proper object naming."
"The overall speed and performance of this solution could be improved. In a future release, it would be useful to be able to do API testing."
"With the codeless process automation across packaged applications, once in a while, if we get a weird application that's not widely used, it gets a little stickier. First, the software has to learn the fields, so you have to identify all the fields. Once you do that, as long as there isn’t any non-standard code in the application, then it works fine. But there's that one step that you have to do, a step you don't have to do with SAP and Salesforce, for example."
"Worksoft Certify needs improvement on customization of reporting and how you report final outcomes."
"As part of our weekly regression, we wanted to use Execution Manager. However, from 2017 until March 2021, Execution Manager was not working as expected in our enrollment. It could have been better. If Execution Manager had worked well, then we could have doubled our productivity. Unfortunately, it had problems."
"What could be improved in Worksoft Certify is its integration with other tools, for example, test management tools such as Jira, ALM, or any other test management tools. That integration is missing."
UiPath Test Suite is ranked 6th in Test Automation Tools with 17 reviews while Worksoft Certify is ranked 8th in Test Automation Tools with 64 reviews. UiPath Test Suite is rated 7.8, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of UiPath Test Suite writes "Can be used by non-developers, and saves us time, but the manual testing needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". UiPath Test Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and OpenText UFT Developer, whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and SmartBear TestComplete. See our UiPath Test Suite vs. Worksoft Certify report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
