Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Functional Tester vs. Zeenyx AscentialTest and other solutions. Updated: January 2021.
455,108 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The ease of use is superior to anything on the market. It's very easy to integrate. We've been very impressed with the tool. Because we primarily use the configuration with SAP, the integration is pretty seamless. But we have used our own in-house VB app as well, and it's worked very well with that."
"We love the Capture 2.0 feature. It seems to work very well."
"The ability to work with the data, with recordsets, and plug those into the scripts is very easy and very powerful. We use it extensively."
"It's script-free, which is really important for our end users because we are usually dealing with colleagues who are not developers and who do not always have the technical background of developing and scripting. It's very useful that there is a nice UI and the tool is script-free."
"One big advantage of Worksoft Certify is its integration with SAP Solution Manager..."
"It is very user-friendly with an appealing UI, unlike a lot of other automation tools that we have evaluated. The fact that it can be used to across SAP and non-SAP applications (including web-based apps) is a big advantage. Using Certify Process Capture functionality has helped in hassle free test design creation, without the need to spend any extra effort to capture test steps and screenshots. The integration elements across HPE ALM and Solution Manager also work well."
"If we write a new test that's 80 percent the same as an existing test, it is pretty straightforward to reuse the steps from existing tests for our new tests and build upon them."
"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 most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"If you use the PowerBuilder application, do choose AscentialTest without thinking twice."
"The most valuable feature of AscentialTest for us is that it fully supports PowerBuilder."
"It’s been really easy to automate the same application TestComplete struggled with. I have been able to automate two of our key applications in just a few months. I haven’t even taken their training."
"In the past, when we've tried to automate some of our web apps, it has not been as robust. If there were one thing that could be improved, it's interaction with web applications. The issue we were running into is that it was harder to identify the objects than it is with some of the other architectured applications."
"The definitions for the objects need to be automated. They need to be recognized automatically by Worksoft Certify instead of changing them back and forth manually. This is also something that Worksoft is currently working on."
"Our interactions with technical support has not been the best always and there is room for improvement especially with respect to the time taken to respond to cases. However, with the right contacts and reasonable escalations we have always managed to get quick attention on our cases."
"One feature that we have been asking for has been to treat tests as code and store the source code for tests in a configuration management tool. Right now, for version control of testing, it's all internally within the tool. If we have a test of a business process and want to revive that test, our methodology now is purely manual work. We go into the tool, create a copy of the existing test, and call the next one: v2. Now, we have two of them and the only way you can tell them apart is by its naming convention."
"I would like to see the impact analysis integrated with the performance testing tool. We have multiple tools doing multiple items. I would like to have one common tool."
"We are looking for some enhancements on the Capture 2.0 tool. This would give us the ability to control it directly, like we could with Capture 1.0. Right now, Capture 2.0 doesn't really work for our Business Analysts."
"There was a change to Capture 2.0. In the end, there have been some challenges with the newer version. Therefore, the company testers, the local ones, do not want to use Capture 2.0."
"When it is unstable, there will be times when a test that we are running in Certify will just stop, and it will say, "Aborted." There will be errors. There will be no explanation as to why it happens. It has now happened maybe one out of 20 times. When it happens, I just tell our QA team to stop Certify and restart it, hoping we don't see it again."
"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"I would like to see an improvement in the User Interface."
"Classes are not as object-oriented as I would like, but I am a programmer and not QA so I expect a lot."
"The only thing I can't wait for is for Zeenyx to add automating Mobile apps."
Pricing and Cost Advice
"We would purchase more licenses right now if they were cheaper. Pricing is a little bit of a hindrance."
"It is expensive compared to some of the other automation tools in the market. However, the benefits and ROI has proved that it has been a good investment."
"The initial upfront cost in terms of licenses, plus all the money that we spent developing tests, has proven it's worth. Now, we can do a regression test suite in ten days as opposed to sixteen weeks."
"Our ROI is primarily a reduction in testing time. The testing, when we were doing it manually, was 30 to 40 percent of the project's cost."
"We ended up buying too many licenses. They were very good at selling it to us, and probably oversold it a little. We bought 45 licenses and have never used more than twenty. However, they gave us a pretty significant discount on the bigger license, so it made sense for us to buy enough that we wouldn't have to go back and ask for more."
"We could use Certify to do robotic process automation, which is basically running a process on your correction system instead of your test system. Therefore, we may do that in the future."
"By using automation, it reduced about 75 percent of the time when compared to any other tool."
"Saving money and better quality, these are the benefits of Certify."
"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."
"Once it starts generating ROI, which for us took between three and six months, one will not even think about the investment."
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: It does allow for good reusability. When it's designed properly and utilized properly, we can put things in a way that… more »
Top Answer: The licensing is yearly.
Top Answer: It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good.
Top Answer: Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000… more »
Top Answer: If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility. There needs to be more… more »
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Compared 31% of the time.
Compared 26% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 1% of the time.
Compared 25% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Compared 51% of the time.
Compared 20% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Also Known As
|Rational Functional Tester||AscentialTest|
|Worksoft is a leading global provider of automation software for high-velocity business process testing and discovery. Enterprises worldwide use Worksoft intelligent automation to innovate faster, lower technology risk, reduce costs, improve quality, and deeply understand their real end-to-end business processes. Global 5000 companies across all industries choose Worksoft for high speed process discovery and functional testing of digital, web, cloud, mobile, big data, and dozens of enterprise applications, including SAP, Oracle, and Salesforce.com.||IBM Rational Functional Tester is an automated functional testing and regression testing tool. This software provides automated testing capabilities for functional, regression, GUI, and data-driven testing. Rational Function Tester supports a range of applications, such as web-based, .Net, Java, Siebel, SAP, terminal emulator-based applications, PowerBuilder, Ajax, Adobe Flex, Dojo Toolkit, GEF, Adobe PDF documents, zSeries, iSeries, and pSeries.||AscentialTest™ by Zeenyx Software is an enterprise level Test Management System that encompasses Test Planning, Development, Data Management, Execution and Defect Tracking for applications running on Windows, the web, java, dotNet, terminals and PowerBuilder. This “next generation” testing solution allows users to build robust automated and manual tests from reusable components created by its powerful object recognition engine without recording or scripting. Our patented ‘snapshot’ technology generates graphical representations of the application under test which allows users to build ‘Steps’ by dragging and dropping objects in a visual test editor. Reusable Steps are combined to form a multitude of automated and manual tests that are easy to create and maintain. With AscentialTest, companies realize a dramatic reduction in test creation and maintenance times, resulting in increased productivity and lower costs.|
Learn more about Worksoft Certify
Learn more about IBM Rational Functional Tester
Learn more about Zeenyx AscentialTest
|Kraft, Reliant Energy, Richemont, Applied Materials, Siemens PLM, Mosaic, Dow Corning, ebay, IBM, Accenture, Fortis BC, US Government, Southwest Airlines||Edumate||TJX Companies, Nuance Communications, Ericsson Inc., Transatlantic Reinsurance Company, Accenture, Nutrition Coordinating Center, Univ. of MN, iConectiv, Fortress Software, and LMP Corp.|
Consumer Goods Company13%
Computer Software Company37%
Comms Service Provider11%
Financial Services Firm6%
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider16%
Financial Services Firm5%
Computer Software Company27%
Comms Service Provider15%
IBM Rational Functional Tester is ranked 24th in Functional Testing Tools with 3 reviews while Zeenyx AscentialTest is ranked 9th in Functional Testing Tools with 5 reviews. IBM Rational Functional Tester is rated 6.6, while Zeenyx AscentialTest is rated 9.6. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Functional Tester writes "Good coverage and compatibility with excellent stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zeenyx AscentialTest writes "Our university students who enter our tests have found it easy to master with minimal assistance, but classes could be more object-oriented". IBM Rational Functional Tester is most compared with Selenium HQ, Micro Focus UFT One, HCL OneTest, Katalon Studio and Automation Anywhere (AA), whereas Zeenyx AscentialTest is most compared with Selenium HQ, SmartBear TestComplete, Tricentis Tosca and Katalon Studio. See our IBM Rational Functional Tester vs. Zeenyx AscentialTest report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing 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.