Last verified April 2026
> mabl vs testim (tricentis)
Both are enterprise auto-healing incumbents. Mabl is standalone and actively evolving. Testim was acquired by Tricentis in 2022 and is increasingly oriented toward the Tricentis portfolio. This comparison helps teams on either platform decide whether to stay or evaluate alternatives.
| Feature | Mabl | Testim (Tricentis) |
|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Independent | Tricentis (acquired 2022) |
| Innovation rate | Active (GenAI roadmap) | Slowing (portfolio integration focus) |
| Self-healing quality | Best-in-class (multi-identifier + LLM) | Solid (multi-identifier) |
| Export | Partial Selenium (3/5) | Partial Selenium/Playwright (3/5) |
| Governance | SSO, RBAC, audit, SOC 2 | SSO, RBAC (Tricentis standard) |
| Price | Custom ($30-50k+/yr est.) | Tiered, community free |
| Best fit | Teams wanting standalone best-in-class | Teams in Tricentis ecosystem |
> verdict
New evaluations: choose Mabl. It has the superior standalone auto-healing product and a faster GenAI roadmap. The pricing opacity is frustrating but the product quality is worth it for enterprise teams with large suites. Existing Testim customers: evaluate at renewal. If you also use qTest, Tosca, or other Tricentis products, staying in the ecosystem may outweigh Mabl's product advantage. If you are a standalone Testim customer with no other Tricentis dependencies, the Mabl migration is worth evaluating.
> faq