BrowserStack vs OpenText Business Processing Testing comparison

BrowserStack and OpenText are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. BrowserStack is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.3, while OpenText is ranked #40. BrowserStack holds a 10.8% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText’s 0.1% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of BrowserStack users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

BrowserStack

Read 26 BrowserStack reviews

5,592 Views
3,443 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Business Processin...

Read 7 OpenText Business Processing Testing reviews

132 Views
37 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

BrowserStack

OpenText Business Processin...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

OpenText Business Processing Testing and BrowserStack are competing products in the realm of software testing solutions. While both offer robust testing capabilities, data comparisons indicate that BrowserStack might be the preferred option due to its comprehensive feature set, which users consider worth the investment.

Features: OpenText Business Processing Testing offers automated business process validation, integration capabilities, and re-usability of content. BrowserStack provides versatile cross-browser testing on real devices, extensive device and OS coverage, and the ability to test across devices including geographic mimicking and VPN configuration.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Business Processing Testing could improve in areas such as the complexity of setup, pricing transparency, and adaptability for smaller businesses. BrowserStack might benefit from extending their trial period, improving documentation for new users, and enhancing performance under low bandwidth conditions.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Business Processing Testing features an enterprise-focused deployment model with dedicated support options. In contrast, BrowserStack offers a cloud-based deployment, reducing setup time and complexity while often being highlighted for responsive customer service. The difference lies in OpenText's tailored support versus BrowserStack’s simplicity and rapid assistance.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Business Processing Testing, while beneficial in long-term enterprise use with a potentially higher setup cost, provides significant ROI through dedicated process testing. BrowserStack offers a more affordable initial investment with quick ROI potential, attributed to its scalable subscription models.

To learn more, read our detailed BrowserStack vs. OpenText Business Processing Testing Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. OpenText Business Processing Testing

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 859,129 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

BrowserStack

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

5th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)

OpenText Business Processin...

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

40th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 10.8%, up from 10.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Business Processing Testing is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

ANand Kale

Sr Practice Lead - Business and Experience Transformation at Peristent Systems

Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users

I integrated BrowserStack into our company's web and application test workflows because it has plugins that work with browsers and applications, allowing for cross-browser testing. BrowserStack was really helpful for cross-browser testing in areas involving mobiles, web applications, or tablets. The tool can help with the testing across all applications. I have not experienced any time-saving feature from the use of the tool. My company uses the product for real-device testing since it has a bunch of devices in our library. My company has a repository where we do manual testing. BrowserStack improved the quality of our company's applications. Improvements I have seen with the testing part revolve around the fact that it is able to do testing at a fast pace. The quality of the product is better since it can go through all the parts of the applications, meaning it can provide high test coverage. The tool is also good in the area of automation. The test coverage is higher, and the time taken during the testing phase is less due to automation. I have not used the product's integration capabilities since my company doesn't have the option to look at other QA testing tools like Selenium, which can be used for the automation capabilities provided. The product should offer more support for cross-browser testing, device testing, and testing across multiple devices. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

Read full review

Revanth Reddy

Consultant at Infrasoft Technologies

Helpful solution that enables us to execute our use cases

There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be a lot easier to understand if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool.

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

"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."

"The most valuable features are the variety of tools available."

"The integration is very good."

"The setup was quite simple. The website easily explains how to set it up and if you want to integrate it with BMP tools there are online simple step tutorials."

"It is a scalable solution."

"The most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."

"The speed of the solution and its performance are valuable."

"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."

More BrowserStack pros

"This solution is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."

"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."

Cons

"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."

"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."

"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."

"BrowserStack is scalable, but cost is significant for those living in Mexico."

"While I was testing I was not 100% sure a that was properly mimicking the browsers or not. We had some issues with a browser, and the reason was the browser itself does not provide any support. If the local system does not provide any support, I think this was the problem. There should be better integration with other solutions, such as JIRA."

"Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product."

"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."

"BrowserStack is very expensive and they keep increasing their cost, which is absolutely ridiculous, especially when someone like LambdaTest is coming through for literal thousands of dollars less, with the same services."

More BrowserStack cons

"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."

"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."

"The price of BrowserStack is high."

"This solution costs less than competing products."

"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."

"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."

"The price is fine."

"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."

"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

University

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?

The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?

My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.

See all answers

What needs improvement with BrowserStack?

In terms of improvements, they can make it snappier. Everything kind of works. They have locked down the phones, which is problematic because there are some test cases that require access to things...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

LambdaTest vs BrowserStack

Compared 34% of the time

Sauce Labs vs BrowserStack

Compared 23% of the time

Perfecto vs BrowserStack

Compared 17% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs BrowserStack

Compared 5% of the time

CrossBrowserTesting vs BrowserStack

Compared 3% of the time

More BrowserStack Competitors

No data available

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack

June 2025

Download BrowserStack product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Business Processing Testing

June 2025

OpenText Business Processing Testing report

Download OpenText Business Processing Testing product report

Also Known As

No data available

Micro Focus Business Process Testing, Business Process Testing, HPE Business Process Testing

Overview

BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.

BrowserStack

OpenText Business Processing Testing (BPT) test framework software will help you move from one-off manual testing and ad hoc functional automated testing to an architected approach with a library of reusable test components. BPT accelerates the move to component-based testing with an integrated test framework approach to creating a repository of reusable test modules that allow for changes to be made once, then propagated across your distributed agile teams to all affected tests.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG

Migros Bank AG

Buyer's Guide

BrowserStack vs. OpenText Business Processing Testing

May 2025

Free Report: BrowserStack vs. OpenText Business Processing Testing

Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. OpenText Business Processing Testing and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our BrowserStack vs. OpenText Business Processing Testing report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional 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.