AWS Device Farm vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and OpenText are both solutions in the Mobile App Testing Tools category. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #6, while OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 7.8. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 2.3% mindshare in MTT, compared to OpenText’s 21.9% mindshare. Additionally, 50% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

AWS Device Farm

Read 2 AWS Device Farm reviews

647 Views
615 Comparison Views

50% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing

Read 97 OpenText Functional Testing reviews

8,409 Views
3,280 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

AWS Device Farm

OpenText Functional Testing

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

OpenText Functional Testing and AWS Device Farm compete in the testing domain. AWS Device Farm seems to have the upper hand with its extensive device coverage and real-time debugging capabilities.

Features: OpenText Functional Testing provides detailed test scripting, robust automation tools, and high-level security ideal for enterprise applications. AWS Device Farm offers a vast selection of real devices for testing, advanced integration with AWS services, and real-time debugging which enhances test reliability.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Functional Testing follows a structured deployment process, supported by established customer assistance. AWS Device Farm features a cloud-based deployment model, reducing initial setup efforts, with on-demand scalability and seamless service integration.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing involves higher upfront costs with a longer ROI, targeting enterprises needing in-house testing. AWS Device Farm's pay-as-you-go model promotes cost efficiency and quicker ROI, appealing to small and medium enterprises with flexible and scalable solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed AWS Device Farm vs. OpenText Functional Testing Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

AWS Device Farm vs. OpenText Functional Testing

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 peers since 2012

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

AWS Device Farm

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

6th

Average Rating

6.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Functional Testing

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (6th), Test Automation Tools (3rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Mobile App Testing Tools category, the mindshare of AWS Device Farm is 2.3%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 21.9%, down from 26.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Mobile App Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

AshishSingh11

Automation Test Lead at Cap Gemini

A stable solution used for malware testing and APM that needs to improve its performance

The setup phase was fine because AWS had given the whole tree structure on their website. So, basically, if we go here and there apart from that tree structure, it does not support it. So they have a very sophisticated tree structure. So that is the only tree structure that we have to follow. Else, there will be problems. I rate the setup process a seven out of ten, with ten being the easiest setup. Since I had to study the solution, it took me a week to properly deploy it. I just followed the instructions given by AWS to deploy the solution. So on their website, whatever the steps they had given, I simply kept on following it.

Read full review

Badari Mallireddy

QA Automation Architect at Emerson

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…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I rate the stability an eight out of ten."

"What I like best about AWS Device Farm is that it offers actual physical devices that let you do more accurate testing because physical devices depict the live testing scenarios much better as opposed to emulated devices. AWS Device Farm is a pretty nice solution. Because it's an AWS service, you can use the CLI to tie in several steps that can create the pipeline, and run it efficiently. AWS Device Farm also gives you monitoring ability, observability, logging, etc., so I'm pretty satisfied with the solution."

"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."

"UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use."

"Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."

"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."

"It's simple to set up."

"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."

"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."

"Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."

More OpenText Functional Testing pros

Cons

"An area for improvement in AWS Device Farm is that it lacks a lot of features that would tie it in with other AWS services. The solution doesn't have great connectivity with other services offered by AWS, for example, AWS Secrets Manager. This should be improved because a lot of times, that missing functionality hampers the quality and engineering standards in terms of deploying the full AWS suite of services. What I'd like to see in the next version of AWS Device Farm is for it to link better, or have some type of enrollment that would tie it in with other AWS services, such as EventBridge, Lambda, Secrets Manager, and any other new service from AWS."

"It is slow. It is super slow. Performance is an area that can be improved."

"I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps."

"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."

"The tool needs to improve its performance since it can become heavy."

"The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile."

"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."

"One area for improvement is its occasional slowness."

"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."

"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."

More OpenText Functional Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"AWS Device Farm is an expensive service overall. You pay per device, and the cost for each device isn't cheap. My company paid for a device slot. It's a yearly subscription for a single device slot, so that's more cost-effective for my company. On a scale of one to five, where one is very expensive and five is very cheap, I'd give AWS Device Farm a two. It's on the more expensive side."

"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."

"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."

"Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."

"The pricing of the product is an issue."

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."

"For the price of five automation licenses, you simply would not be able to hire five manual testers for two years worth of 24/7 manual testing work on demand."

"It's an expensive solution."

"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."

More OpenText Functional Testing pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

24%

Computer Software Company

15%

Healthcare Company

Manufacturing Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

12%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Perfecto vs AWS Device Farm

Compared 41% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web vs AWS Device Farm

Compared 32% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs AWS Device Farm

Compared 27% of the time

More AWS Device Farm Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 26% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 11% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 8% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 7% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 6% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Mobile App Testing Tools

August 2025

Download AWS Device Farm product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing

August 2025

Download OpenText Functional Testing product report

Also Known As

No data available

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro

Overview

AWS Device Farm is an application testing service that lets you improve the quality of your web and mobile apps by testing them across an extensive range of desktop browsers and real mobile devices; without having to provision and manage any testing infrastructure. The service enables you to run your tests concurrently on multiple desktop browsers or real devices to speed up the execution of your test suite, and generates videos and logs to help you quickly identify issues with your app.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

OpenText Functional Testing provides automated testing with compatibility across technologies, browsers, and platforms. It targets APIs, GUIs, and applications like SAP and Oracle for efficient test automation, emphasizing usability and integration with tools such as Jenkins and ALM.

OpenText Functional Testing offers wide-ranging automation capabilities for functional and regression testing, API testing, and automation across web, desktop, and mainframe applications. It supports script recording and object identification, appealing to less technical users. Despite its advantages, it grapples with memory issues, stability concerns, and a challenging scripting environment. Its VBScript reliance limits flexibility, generating demand for enhanced language support and speed improvement. Users appreciate its role in continuous integration and deployment processes, managing test data efficiently, and reducing manual testing efforts.

What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing?

Multiplatform Compatibility: Works seamlessly across technologies, browsers, and platforms.
Automation Span: Provides automation for APIs, GUIs, SAP, and Oracle applications.
Intuitive Design: Object identification and recording simplify usage for all coding levels.
Integration Capabilities: Interfaces with tools like Jenkins and ALM for streamlined testing.
Built-in Frameworks: Offers frameworks like BPT for accelerated test development.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Reduced Manual Testing: Minimizes the effort required for manual testing tasks.
Time Efficiency: Accelerates testing processes with user-friendly features.
Seamless Integration: Integrates with CI/CD tools, enhancing operational productivity.
Comprehensive Coverage: Automates test cases involving multiple scenarios effectively.

In industries like finance and healthcare, OpenText Functional Testing is leveraged for end-to-end automation, ensuring streamlined processes and accuracy in testing. Many companies utilize it for efficient test data management and integrating testing within continuous integration/deployment operations.

OpenText

Sample Customers

NFL, Etsy, Tableau, Gannett, Miniclip, Allstate, Rainforest, goibibo, mysmartprice, Zillow

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services

Buyer's Guide

AWS Device Farm vs. OpenText Functional Testing

July 2025

Free Report: AWS Device Farm vs. OpenText Functional Testing

Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Device Farm vs. OpenText Functional Testing and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our AWS Device Farm vs. OpenText Functional Testing report.

See our list of best Mobile App Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Mobile App 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.