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

Automation Anywhere vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.8
Automation Anywhere offers varied ROI, with quick returns from task automation and improved efficiency despite initial costs.
Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText Functional Testing automates tasks, reducing testing time and costs, yielding significant long-term ROI and system compatibility.
In terms of cost, we participated in projects achieving two to three million dollars in annual savings.
As a return on investment, we have achieved a 250% ROI in six to nine months, and sometimes it increases up to 380% percent.
Automation Anywhere has helped us save money.
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.9
Automation Anywhere's customer service is mixed, with praise for knowledgeable staff but concerns about response times and support quality.
Sentiment score
6.1
OpenText Functional Testing support is mixed, with responsive service but potential delays and escalations for technical issues.
Whenever we need help, we can reach out to them, and they help us out.
We also have dedicated account managers and technical experts to solve our problems related to Automation Anywhere.
We just have to raise a ticket, after which we receive a call, email, or ping from the Automation Anywhere team.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
After creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Automation Anywhere is praised for scalability, enabling easy expansion and resource adjustment while efficiently accommodating diverse automation needs.
Sentiment score
7.1
OpenText Functional Testing scales well with planning, though browser support and licensing issues require attention for seamless integration.
As we are using Microsoft Copilot for our AI agents, I look forward to integrating it with Automation Anywhere and its solutions, seeing it as a beneficial partnership as Automation progresses toward AI as the main solution.
For Windows-based applications, it provides UI interface automation, which enhances its scalability.
Automation Anywhere is highly scalable for both horizontal and vertical expansions.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.9
Automation Anywhere's stability varies; reliable for some, issues arise with legacy systems and updates but improves with strong infrastructure.
Sentiment score
6.6
OpenText Functional Testing is generally reliable, but occasional stability issues arise, influenced by machine specs and implementation methods.
With the latest applications, there are no significant issues like freezing or crashing.
From a stability and reliability perspective, we can remain confident that the product performs as an enterprise solution and meets expected standards.
If you have good best practices, reusable code, an effective framework, and a solid development methodology, bots can be very stable.
One of the key stability issues was that Windows would consume memory without releasing it, leading to regression testing crashes.
 

Room For Improvement

Automation Anywhere needs improved integrations, UI, debugging, support, scalability, pricing, and training resources for better adoption.
OpenText Functional Testing needs enhancements in object identification, performance, cost, scripting support, mobile features, and open-source tool integration.
It is better to write a Python script instead of using Automation Anywhere's package when dealing with Excel because it is buggy and tends to break.
Making the product more lightweight by reducing its dependency on infrastructure could greatly help in the long run.
It would be beneficial if the platform provided options for power developers to integrate seamlessly with languages like Java or C#, allowing them to write their own scripts and code.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.
We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing.
 

Setup Cost

Automation Anywhere is costly for small businesses, with flexible pricing and discounts, yet challenges persist in price-sensitive markets.
OpenText Functional Testing is costly but cost-effective due to robust capabilities and potential reductions in manual testing efforts.
It is more cost-efficient compared to all other RPA platforms.
Automation Anywhere costs are aligned with UiPath and Blue Prism, which are also expensive.
It is not cheap, with costs ranging between 700 to 800 dollars per month.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
 

Valuable Features

Automation Anywhere simplifies bot creation with intuitive tools, AI-driven features, and strong integration, enhancing productivity and process automation.
OpenText Functional Testing provides extensive platform compatibility, strong object recognition, and robust automation frameworks enhancing diverse testing environments.
I can set it up to provide users with a form to fill in all required information, and then the bot operates based on those specifications.
For example, the email module has been enhanced over the years to support all the latest authentication technologies. That is very important as we move away from username and password and embrace multi-factor authentication.
Automation Anywhere has undergone drastic changes over the past five years, transitioning from version 10 to A360, including desktop-based and cloud-based options.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier.
 

Categories and Ranking

Automation Anywhere
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
608
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (2nd), Robotic Process Automation (RPA) (2nd), Process Mining (2nd), Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) (3rd), Agentic Automation (1st)
OpenText Functional Testing
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (6th), Test Automation Tools (3rd)
 

Featured Reviews

Vatsal Mehta - PeerSpot reviewer
Accommodates diverse use cases and effectively meets customer requirements
AI agents need further improvements. AI agent technology in agentic process automation is still evolving. We have only scratched the surface, and there are many potential use cases yet to be explored. As technology advances, I believe it will enable us to implement more comprehensive automation solutions. Document Automation has issues related to speed. When I compare Document Automation with IQ Bot, IQ Bot is faster than Document Automation. My understanding is that they are still evolving Document Automation, and this issue of slowness will be resolved in the upcoming .35 version, so we are good with that. They are working on signature identification and validations for handwritten documents. Currently, we are able to extract data out of scanned but digital images, but there is still scope for improvement for handwritten documents.
Badari Mallireddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation becomes feasible with diverse application support and faster development
I have used UFT for web application automation, desktop application automation, and Oracle ERP automation UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use. It requires less coding, has built-in features for API testing, and most importantly, it supports more than just web…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
5%
Manufacturing Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How good is Automation Anywhere for RPA processes?
It depends on your use case. Is it simply to automate a couple of processes? Is it to augment a human team? AA is very good in certain situations but lacks in others. For me, it's more the team tha...
How good is Automation Anywhere for RPA processes?
From my experience using AA tool, it depends on the applications that you want to automate, because there some applications that AA has limitations for, such as the Oracle. For web-based applicatio...
How good is Automation Anywhere for RPA processes?
It is a highly preferred RPA tool. You can check my Automation Anywhere Review to know more.
How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...
What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT One?
My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
Areas of OpenText Functional Testing that have room for improvement include having an option to store objects in the public repository when using Object Spy and adding objects, as it currently stor...
 

Also Known As

Automation Anywhere, Testing Anywhere, Automation Anywhere Enterprise
Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Google, Linkedin, Cisco, Juniper Networks, DellEMC, Comcast, Mastercard, Quest Diagnostics
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Automation Anywhere vs. OpenText Functional Testing and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.