No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Bitbar vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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

Bitbar
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
30th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Platforms (9th)
OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (3rd), Test Automation Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Bitbar is 1.5%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 8.1%, down from 8.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing8.1%
Bitbar1.5%
Other90.4%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1288116 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Digital & Cognitive Services at a tech company with 11-50 employees
A testing platform with a good API for apps, but pricing is complicated
I like that the AI Testbot is a near-zero code application for testing. For this use case, the function is good. The services are robust. Game testing and the API for apps are also good. From the perspective of pricing, licensing, ease of use, integration with other applications, impact complexity, and integration with other tools, we're pretty much very satisfied.
Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Has supported faster test execution and increased flexibility while offering room to improve support responsiveness
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates another day of delay to get to the level that's needed. This is a common practice across most companies where you call, you get the entry-level person, and then they work their way up to help screen calls so that they are more focused.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The feature that I like the most is that you can use different frameworks, whether it's APM or something else, and you don't need to worry about the framework."
"The overall product is awesome for device fragmentation, but not for automation."
"Ability to use different frameworks."
"From the perspective of pricing, licensing, ease of use, integration with other applications, impact complexity, and integration with other tools, we're pretty much very satisfied."
"Game testing and the API for apps are good."
"Micro Focus UFT is a good product in my opinion; I can say it's a stable system and it's a legacy, and we have been using it for a long time."
"The solution is in the top list for automatic functional testing."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"UFT provides Business Process Testing from within UFT, using the native UFT user interface."
"The most valuable feature is the automation of the tests, which saves us a lot of time, especially during the regression tests."
"We have performed 3500 test case automations, and we are able to execute them in just five days, whereas if we were to do this manually, it would take 30 days."
"One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA."
"It's simple to set up."
 

Cons

"Lacking capability options that can be directly integrated."
"Improvement of the product could be made by running the dashboard part, it gets stuck sometimes."
"Some stages of its automation is not working correctly and I need to make changes in the code created by Testdroid."
"Their pricing structure is complicated and can be improved."
"Customer service is a big drawback. From my personal experience, after creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody."
"In cases of longer tests (in forms of so-called Mega Scripts), there can be a seriously huge usage of virtual memory by UFT that can lead to SystemOutOfMemory exceptions which are showstoppers and a huge annoyance."
"When debugging code in UFT, it would crash, freeze and hang a lot."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"It needs to be able to be used on Chrome, Firefox, and other browsers on Macs and not just Safari. That's a very key requirement for my organization."
"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory."
"When the number of automation tests are very high, say 5000 to 10000, even with eight to 10 licenses, UFT can take over 24 hours for execution."
"UFT still requires some coding."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is complicated. It's in the middle."
"The price is only $3,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company. Probably no more than five or 10. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't see that being an issue."
"HPE recently extended the demo license period from 30 days to 60 days which was a very wise and popular decision to give potential customers more time to install it and try it for free. Even if your company has a salesperson come in and demo UFT, I would highly encourage at least one of your developers or automation engineers to download and install it to explore for themselves the functionality and features included during the demo trial period."
"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."
"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
15%
Construction Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
University
8%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise74
 

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...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT One?
I'm more familiar with Functional Testing. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is a different product set that functions as an IDE for writing custom code. We don't leverage that product bec...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rovio, Paf, Supercell, NITRO Games, Seriously, AVG, Google, Bosch, Yahoo, Microsoft, Yandex, Mozilla, eBay, PayPal, TESCO, Cisco WebEx, Facebook, LinkedIn, skype, Subway
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Bitbar vs. OpenText Functional Testing and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.