Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

ACCELQ Automate vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

ACCELQ Automate
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
21st
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
9th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of ACCELQ Automate is 1.5%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 2.8%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers2.8%
ACCELQ Automate1.5%
Other95.7%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

PrabhuKrishnamoorthy - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director at Ascendion
Provides good stability and a valuable object identification feature
We evaluated data testing for millions of records. As per architecture, it can efficiently run a few thousands of records. However, we couldn't implement it for millions of records. Thus, it works well for a small amount of data. We have 30 users for it in our organization and use it daily. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten.
Eitan Gold - PeerSpot reviewer
SQA Manager at Elmo Motion Control Ltd.
User-friendly integration with support for Visual Studio enhances GUI testing capabilities
OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio. The support is excellent. It is easy to implement tests with OpenText UFT Developer. We primarily use it for GUI testing and testing web applications with another application. This is the main usage for us. We also integrate it with the N-unit Framework, and they work well together.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The platform contributes to faster test release cycles."
"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."
"I believe the main feature for using it is the flexibility across different platforms."
"When they've been working with it for a while and they see the complexity when you're doing real and tough test situations, then they see that this kind of tool is very, very good."
"We have UI controls in Infragistics logic that have been identified by OpenText Functional Testing for Developers, but those controls are not supported by TestComplete, which is what I find most valuable."
"Even with the problems that I have mentioned, I think that this is one of the best solutions on the market right now."
"LeanFT's been very good."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
 

Cons

"The platform's reporting aspects can be broader and include more granular details."
"Since it was a slightly different way of doing things, it was a little complex."
"In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary. This limits the technology's ability to recognize every object."
"I think the one thing we're basically asking for should be JavaScript support, but I think they will start adding JavaScript support in the future."
"Because of all the problems and limitations of the UTF product, I would rate it at only a four out of ten (where ten is the best and one is the worst)."
"As the releases come, support for all technologies in the systems under test that UFT currently support will be the obvious place for improvement."
"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"I'd like to not have to use Selenium. I'd like to be able to do headless scripting and not just always be UI serving."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. It can be optimized."
"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
"When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."
"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."
"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Performing Arts
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise29
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?
As of now, we don't have integration in the CI/CD pipeline, but they are supporting that as well. When your machine is in a locked state, you can even execute the Windows application automation. Mi...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
For functional testing, we are using OpenText Functional Testing for Developers as our product for testing. I am using the cross-browser testing capabilities of OpenText Functional Testing for Deve...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

FISCHER, optanix, ERICSSON, BenifitMall, QuickPivot, DIGITALFUEL, westcreek
Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Katalon Studio, Worksoft and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.