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

Broadcom Service Virtualization 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Broadcom Service Virtualiza...
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Service Virtualization (1st)
OpenText Functional Testing
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (4th), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Broadcom Service Virtualization is designed for Service Virtualization and holds a mindshare of 27.7%, down 35.3% compared to last year.
OpenText Functional Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 6.4% mindshare, down 10.1% since last year.
Service Virtualization Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Broadcom Service Virtualization27.7%
Parasoft Virtualize22.8%
OpenText Service Virtualization14.8%
Other34.7%
Service Virtualization
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing6.4%
Tricentis Tosca12.9%
BrowserStack7.5%
Other73.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

DM
Senior Project Manager at Infosys
Can be used for the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance
We use it for the virtualization of third-party APIs for performance testing. Our second use case is related to the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance, which is used for insurance clients In the case of the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party…
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

"It is easy to use, has a faster time to market, and provides flexibility."
"We have had developers produce code later than we wanted to, but we've had some other stuff that was dependent on that. So what we were able to do was virtualize these assets and then go forward with our developer and not have to wait for these additional services to be available."
"You can have a lot of different people with different technologies use the tool, without any programming experience at all, all the way up to people who can program. And then, the more technical that you are, the more programming you have, the more you're able to customize the tool."
"The most valuable features include the capability to use other program languages such as PLSQR, JAVA, .NET."
"Helps us to remove barriers that we have with dependencies on services that we don't own, or services that don't even exist yet."
"You can create virtual services from a live recording or convert raw traffic into request/response pairs."
"It is definitely scalable."
"The ability to create virtual services and deploy them as Docker containers, and include them in our Jenkins build pipelines, is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier."
"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"It is a stable solution."
"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 most valuable features are its support for multiple technologies, ease of coding, object repository, and ability to design our own framework. The recording playback feature allows those unfamiliar with coding to use the tool."
 

Cons

"I would rate the tech support a nine out of ten. They need more knowledge about the connectivity to DevOps orchestration."
"I would like to have more flexibility towards the mainframe virtualization and also in JDBC virtualization."
"We had to implement an external service catalog. We put it in ServiceNow. I would like to see an integrated service catalog."
"UI should be more user friendly: better usability, more testing oriented."
"CA actually releases a new version every year. We had issues with the upgrade prior to the latest one."
"More examples of portal-based virtualization."
"​From a reporting perspective I think we would like to have a more user-friendly approach."
"One major feature I would like to see is on the user administration part. Right now, anybody can access any of the folders and any of the projects."
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."
"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"The tool needs to improve its performance since it can become heavy."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"One thing that confused me, and now just mildly irritates me, is that we migrated from QuickTest Pro to HP UFT, Unified Functional Test. After we did the migration, it turned out that we didn't really have Unified Functional Test at all."
"The product wasn't easy for developers to learn and pick up in the area revolving around scripting for automation, and there was a lot of resistance from developers, causing my company to rely on specialist resources."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"There is a yearly licensing cost, and I would give it a four out of five."
"There are additional fees for advanced-level technical support."
"I don't have the exact dollar amount, but we have spent close to $1,000,000 for a three-year agreement, for an enterprise level."
"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
"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."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"The price is one aspect that could be improved."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"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."
"The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
882,606 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Marketing Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
9%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise98
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise71
 

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

ITKO LISA, CA LISA, CA Service Virtualization
Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Union Bank, Swisscom, Autotrader, KPN, ING Bank, Best Buy, American Family Insurance, TESCO, Telefonica, Molina Healthcare, California DMV, Aktia, City Index, Con-way, DirecTV, GRU Airport, Liquidnet, NAB, Nordstrom, T-Mobile, TIM Brasil, 
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, Tricentis, Parasoft and others in Service Virtualization. Updated: February 2026.
882,606 professionals have used our research since 2012.