We performed a comparison between Telerik Test Studio and UiPath Test Suite 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."Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."
"UiPath's most valuable features are reusability and low-code aspects. It works across both desktop and web applications."
"We are finding bugs and defects much faster."
"Our team used to require five to six days to complete the entire release or execution cycle. Now, we're able to complete it within just one or one and a half days."
"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."
"It facilitates the delegation of control to multiple users and offers an efficient way to organize tasks using labels."
"Being able to use regular expressions, activities, and attributes is valuable."
"The console, in a single pane, allows us to understand where we are in the testing environment."
"It is a very scalable product."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
"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."
"UiPath’s Test Suite manual testing doesn’t work for our organization based on how the QA Analysts do their manual testing and the artifacts that are needed for deployment."
"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."
"Our primary application is built on Windows, so we've faced no significant challenges. However, I think mobile automation is one area where the solution still needs some work."
"They could improve the visualization of the product."
"UiPath could further enhance its functionality by simplifying the test case creation process within Test Suite."
"UiPath needs to improve its Test Manager feature. Defect management and reporting also need improvement."
"Orchestrator is not easy to use or understand."
Telerik Test Studio is ranked 18th in Test Automation Tools with 5 reviews while UiPath Test Suite is ranked 6th in Test Automation Tools with 17 reviews. Telerik Test Studio is rated 8.0, while UiPath Test Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Telerik Test Studio writes "Very good performance and load testing capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UiPath Test Suite writes "Can be used by non-developers, and saves us time, but the manual testing needs improvement". Telerik Test Studio is most compared with Selenium HQ, Ranorex Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and Katalon Studio, whereas UiPath Test Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, SmartBear TestComplete and Katalon Studio. See our Telerik Test Studio vs. UiPath Test Suite report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing 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.
