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

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs OpenText UFT One comparison

Digital.ai and OpenText are both solutions in the Mobile App Testing Tools category. Digital.ai is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.0, while OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1. Digital.ai holds a 1.4% mindshare in MTT, compared to OpenText’s 24.0% mindshare. Additionally, 66% of Digital.ai users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of OpenText users who would recommend it.
Digital.ai Continuous Testing
Read 3 Digital.ai Continuous Testing reviews
  • 210 Views
  • 145 Comparison Views
66% willing to recommend
OpenText UFT One
Read 96 OpenText UFT One reviews
  • 3,717 Views
  • 2,358 Comparison Views
87% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT One and Digital.ai Continuous Testing compete in the test automation landscape. Digital.ai Continuous Testing emerges as the preferred choice due to its comprehensive feature set and operational efficiency.

Features: OpenText UFT One provides robust cross-platform testing capabilities, an extensive range of integrations with enterprise tools, and reliable automation processes. Digital.ai Continuous Testing offers advanced cloud testing options, significant scalability, and efficient automation, alongside broad test coverage and versatile test execution.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Digital.ai Continuous Testing is recognized for its seamless cloud-based deployment model, enabling quick setup, and its customer service is noted for being responsive and supportive. OpenText UFT One has a traditional on-premises deployment, which can result in longer setup times, although it maintains good customer service.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One demands a substantial initial investment but promises significant returns through reliable performance and robust testing functionalities. Digital.ai Continuous Testing may involve higher ongoing costs yet offers a high ROI through its extensive automation features and value-centric pricing, which often offsets initial expense considerations.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One Report (Updated: April 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One
April 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 849,963 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

Digital.ai Continuous Testing
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
9th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
20th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (2nd)
OpenText UFT One
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
96
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Mobile App Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Continuous Testing is 1.4%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 24.0%, down from 26.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile App Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Alan Chiou - PeerSpot reviewer
Has Mobile Studio feature which can generate scripts
The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version.
Read full review
Don Ingerson - PeerSpot reviewer
With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results
With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files. For Web browsers, UFT 12.54 supports IE9, IE10, IE11, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome (versions 31.0 to 54.9), Firefox (versions 27.0 to 49.0). Besides GUI testing, UFT supports database testing and API testing (Docker, WSDL, and SOAP). For the first time ever, HP started to expand the testing capabilities of UFT (QTP) beyond Windows beginning with UFT 12.00. A UFT user can now run tests on Web applications on a Safari browser that is running on a remote Mac computer.
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

"Experitest is one of the only companies to offer a real device on the cloud to perform testing. They also provide quality documentations that help you navigate and maximize the solution."
"The most useful feature for me is Mobile Studio. It has a UI where I can click on elements, and it generates a script for me. Mobile Studio can generate code from testing steps. I'm using Python with it."
"The most valuable part of Experitest is the number of real devices on which the test is run."
"It's simple to set up."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"​Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."
"Has improved our organization by allowing us to obtain fast, detailed information about the behavior of our products and to supply this to the customer, enabling us to work together without the need for special programming knowledge."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"It offers a wide range of testing."
More OpenText UFT One pros
 

Cons

"I would also like to see more videos and descriptions that could make installation more efficient."
"The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version."
"I have been automating tests for many years on many things but not on mobile devices. The amount of time that I have spent on just figuring out how to use Experitest and get it to work was quite long compared to what I have been doing before. I spent the first two weeks just getting it started. It would be good to have some video explanation of how to use it on your devices and get started. Their online documentation is quite good and extensive, but it would be quite good to have some end-to-end examples demonstrated."
"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."
"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."
"There could be improvements in report export features similar to SmartBear."
"[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."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
"The tool needs to improve its performance since it can become heavy."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
More OpenText UFT One cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We make monthly payments. The cost is dependent on the number of devices we intend to support."
"It is quite fairly priced, but it really depends on your budget. It is somewhere in the mid-range of products. It is not free and it is not QGP that nearly costs a whole house. You pay for the number of users who require access to execute the tests."
"The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker."
"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"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."
"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 products, the solution is very expensive."
"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 took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
849,963 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Retailer
11%
Insurance Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I...
See all answers
What is your primary use case for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?
I'm using Digital.ai Continuous Testing to create and test a mobile application. We're developing and testing a mobile app.
See all answers
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...
See all answers
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.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
OpenText UFT One required knowledge of VBScript, which is a limited version of Visual Basic. We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory ...
See all answers
 

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing Logo
BrowserStack vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing
Compared 47% of the time
Perfecto vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing Logo
Perfecto vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing
Compared 30% of the time
LambdaTest vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing Logo
LambdaTest vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing
Compared 23% of the time
More Digital.ai Continuous Testing Competitors
Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 31% of the time
OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One Logo
OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 12% of the time
UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT One Logo
UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 9% of the time
Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One Logo
Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 8% of the time
SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One Logo
SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 7% of the time
More OpenText UFT One Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
ConformIQ Creator vs. Digital.ai Continuous Testing
April 2025
Digital.ai Continuous Testing reportDownload Digital.ai Continuous Testing product report
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One
April 2025
OpenText UFT One reportDownload OpenText UFT One product report
 

Also Known As

Experitest Seetest, Experitest
Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
 

Overview

Experitest's continuous testing solutions enable enterprises to reduce risk and provide their customers satisfying, error-free experiences across all devices and browsers. They seamlessly integrate with best-in-class tools throughout the DevOps pipeline allowing organizations to rapidly deliver highly protected, quality applications at-speed and at-scale.

Digital.ai

Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications.

Read white paper

OpenText
 

Sample Customers

Samsung, American Express, Barclays, China Mobile, Citi, Cisco, McAfee
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Buyer's Guide
Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One
April 2025
Free Report: Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One
Find out what your peers are saying about Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
849,963 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best Mobile App Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation Tools vendors.

We monitor all Mobile App 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.