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 28.6%, down 36.7% compared to last year.
OpenText Functional Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 6.2% mindshare, down 10.2% since last year.
Service Virtualization Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Broadcom Service Virtualization28.6%
Parasoft Virtualize26.2%
OpenText Service Virtualization14.8%
Other30.400000000000006%
Service Virtualization
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing6.2%
Tricentis Tosca12.0%
BrowserStack6.8%
Other75.0%
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 definitely scalable."
"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."
"We are able to quickly scale our requests. We have tested across thousands of requests. We have had no problems so far."
"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 innovation is amazing. CA has continued to add to services that it supports, the transports that it supports, and has built all of the enterprise capabilities into the product as well."
"CA Service Virtualization has helped us advance the development cycle when third-party interfaces are not available to us."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"The ability to do parallel development and testing reduces our costs for duplicating environments, improving the productivity of our developers, and bringing products faster to market."
"The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."
"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."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
"OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier."
"The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
 

Cons

"I would like to have more flexibility towards the mainframe virtualization and also in JDBC virtualization."
"CA actually releases a new version every year. We had issues with the upgrade prior to the latest one."
"DevTest is pretty massive. It's hard to tell what different parts of it can be used to do different things. They should modulize it more."
"Needs some additional lightweight, portable elements."
"​From a reporting perspective I think we would like to have a more user-friendly approach."
"It is not a stable solution."
"I really want to see more of the "express" kind of model, where you get a little bit for free. I'd love to be able to see you be able to edit and author tests without having to be connected to a licensed server. And then, if you want to go and execute tests, then you go and connect to the server... I think it would unblock people to be able to do a lot more work from home or from remote places, where they can't really connect to the server."
"We had to implement an external service catalog. We put it in ServiceNow. I would like to see an integrated service catalog."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."
"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 overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"I would like Micro Focus to provide more information on their portal about their newer products. The information about UFT One was outdated. The image recognition features could also be better."
"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."
"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"It's an expensive solution."
"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
883,448 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Marketing Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Performing Arts
8%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
8%
Insurance Company
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.
883,448 professionals have used our research since 2012.