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

"Scalability has actually worked well and we are able to bring it to multiple environments."
"In the case of the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance, there was a device terminal, which was interacting with the application via the TCP/IP protocol. Most of the tools don't support that, but we were able to achieve it using Broadcom Service Virtualization."
"Unit testing or early life testing did not have to be stopped or delayed because those services were not available."
"It is definitely scalable."
"It's got probably the greatest amount of features, in terms of different technologies that you can automate and virtualize, out of any of the solutions out there."
"We have been using it extensively for the shift left process and testing. It helps us to accelerate and virtualize services and assets that we don't have. It enables to test faster."
"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 feature is that it supports so many protocols. We, being a large bank, have almost all the protocols, and it supports all of them, so that's one good thing."
"The best features of OpenText Functional Testing include descriptive programming, the ability to add objects in the repository, and its ease of use for UI compared to other tools."
"The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests."
"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."
"UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use."
"It is a stable solution."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"Automation of tests is done very fast with UFT One."
 

Cons

"CA actually releases a new version every year. We had issues with the upgrade prior to the latest one."
"I would rate the tech support a nine out of ten. They need more knowledge about the connectivity to DevOps orchestration."
"More examples of portal-based virtualization."
"It is not a stable solution."
"They can always work on usability and making simple things simple to do. This is true of every product that deals with complexity."
"The workstation component has a very out-dated UI and is in dire need of a facelift."
"UI should be more user friendly: better usability, more testing oriented."
"The cost is an area that needs improvement. There are a couple of other tools which provide support for performance testing with the base version itself, but Broadcom needs a separate component to support virtualization for performance testing. This is a costly component."
"The initial setup is complex."
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing."
"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is a yearly licensing cost, and I would give it a four out of five."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"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."
"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."
"The price is reasonable."
"It's an expensive solution."
"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."
"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 a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."
"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
881,565 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Marketing Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
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 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?
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...
 

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: January 2026.
881,565 professionals have used our research since 2012.