Eggplant Performance vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

The compared Keysight Technologies and OpenText solutions aren't in the same category. Keysight Technologies is ranked #12 in PTT , with an average rating of 7.0, and holds a 1.8% mindshare in the category. OpenText is ranked #2 in FT , with an average rating of 7.8, and holds a 8.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Keysight Technologies users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Eggplant Performance

Read 4 Eggplant Performance reviews

557 Views
284 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing

Read 97 OpenText Functional Testing reviews

8,018 Views
5,773 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Eggplant Performance

OpenText Functional Testing

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Eggplant Performance and OpenText Functional Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Perforce, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Performance Testing Tools Report (Updated: October 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Performance Testing Tools

October 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 871,358 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

Eggplant Performance

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (12th)

OpenText Functional Testing

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (3rd)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Eggplant Performance is designed for Performance Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.8%, up 1.3% compared to last year.
OpenText Functional Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 8.5% mindshare, down 9.5% since last year.

Performance Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Eggplant Performance	1.8%
Apache JMeter	16.1%
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)	13.6%
Other	68.5%

Performance Testing Tools

Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing	8.5%
Tricentis Tosca	18.4%
BrowserStack	10.0%
Other	63.1%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Shyam_Prasad

AVP - Testing & QA at Laminaar Aviation

Offers unique object identification, ideal for UI layer regression automation but limited scalability

Performance is one key area for improvement. It can be slower compared to other tools I've used. Secondly, we have a very limited resource pool that uses this tool in India. So, finding resources familiar with Eggplant in India is challenging due to lack of affiliation programs and so on.

Read full review

Badari Mallireddy

QA Automation Architect at Emerson

Automation becomes feasible with diverse application support and faster development

I have used UFT for web application automation, desktop application automation, and Oracle ERP automation UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use. It requires less coding, has built-in features for API testing, and most importantly, it supports more than just web…

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

"It is not a conventional test automation tool. It uses optical character recognition (OCR) to identify objects. It makes it the best in the class."

"We find the solution stable and scalable."

"We don't have a big team of people that can watch the dials and check that everything is okay. We're doing a lot of the monitoring of our website and our product at the side of the desk. We need a solution that does a lot for us, and that's what Eggplant does."

"The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."

"The solution is easy to integrate with other platforms."

"UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use."

"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."

"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."

"OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier."

"Automation of tests is done very fast with UFT One."

"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."

More OpenText Functional Testing pros

Cons

"Performance is one key area for improvement. It can be slower compared to other tools I've used."

"I'd like to see the ability to integrate the user experience through device forms like AWS device forms or source labs."

"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis."

"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."

"The user interface could be improved"

"You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out."

"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."

"I am not sure if they have a vision of how they want to position the leads in the market, because if you look at Tosca, Tosca is one of the automation tools that have a strategy, and it recently updated its strategy with SAP. They are positioning them as a type of continuous testing automation tool. And if you notice Worksoft, particularly the one tool for your enterprise application, your Worksoft is positioning. I am not sure if Micro Focus UFT has a solid strategy in place. They must differentiate themselves so that people recognize Micro Focus UFT for that reason."

"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."

"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function."

More OpenText Functional Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is competitive in India."

"Eggplant came out as the most competitive in terms of commercials (terms and conditions) which was positive. When we did the initial negotiations, Eggplant started at a price but they were open to negotiations and we did negotiate a discount. That was really important to us because it showed a level of commitment to us."

"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."

"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.""

"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."

"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."

"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."

"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

More OpenText Functional Testing pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

871,358 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Retailer

11%

Energy/Utilities Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

20%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	20
Midsize Enterprise	12
Large Enterprise	71

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Eggplant Performance?

It is not a conventional test automation tool. It uses optical character recognition (OCR) to identify objects. It makes it the best in the class.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Eggplant Performance?

The pricing is competitive in India.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Eggplant Performance?

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?

Areas of OpenText Functional Testing that have room for improvement include having an option to store objects in the public repository when using Object Spy and adding objects, as it currently stor...

See all answers

Comparisons

Appium vs Eggplant Performance

Compared 45% of the time

Apache JMeter vs Eggplant Performance

Compared 29% of the time

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs Eggplant Performance

Compared 25% of the time

More Eggplant Performance Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 24% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 11% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 8% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 7% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Performance Testing Tools

October 2025

Download Eggplant Performance product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing

October 2025

Download OpenText Functional Testing product report

Also Known As

TestPlant eggPlant Performance

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

Overview

eggPlant Performance provides sophisticated performance testing and load testing tools that can test the widest range of technology and can scale up to simulate any load you need, but are still easy-to-use. eggPlant Performance has been designed to cleanly manage the difficult stuff so you spend more of your time looking at what really matters – improving the user experience of your application. It ensures that your cloud and server based applications will continue to work, perform, and provide an excellent user experience with hundreds or thousands of simultaneous users. eggPlant Performance consists of three main components: Studio, Test Controller, and Analyzer. Studio is used to create the different components of a load test (including scripts, test data, test definitions, and monitoring targets). Test Controller is used subsequently to execute the tests and monitor them during runtime. Analyzer is then used to view completed test runs and their results, as well as generate a wide variety of charts and tables to analyze the data. eggPlant Performance supports a variety of virtual user types for different automation options, depending on the performance or load testing requirements and objectives. — Web HTPP/S: For protocol-level web scripting — Rich clients/UI-based: This includes Citrix VUs (for automating any desktop app published over Citrix), eggPlant Functional VUs (for integration with TestPlant’s functional UI testing tool), WinDriver VUs(for driving the interface of any Windows-based rich client application through a combination of object- and image-based approaches), Selenium VUs (for automating the user experience of browsers). — TCP/UDP: For recording network traffic

Keysight Technologies

OpenText Functional Testing provides automated testing with compatibility across technologies, browsers, and platforms. It targets APIs, GUIs, and applications like SAP and Oracle for efficient test automation, emphasizing usability and integration with tools such as Jenkins and ALM.

OpenText Functional Testing offers wide-ranging automation capabilities for functional and regression testing, API testing, and automation across web, desktop, and mainframe applications. It supports script recording and object identification, appealing to less technical users. Despite its advantages, it grapples with memory issues, stability concerns, and a challenging scripting environment. Its VBScript reliance limits flexibility, generating demand for enhanced language support and speed improvement. Users appreciate its role in continuous integration and deployment processes, managing test data efficiently, and reducing manual testing efforts.

What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing?

Multiplatform Compatibility: Works seamlessly across technologies, browsers, and platforms.
Automation Span: Provides automation for APIs, GUIs, SAP, and Oracle applications.
Intuitive Design: Object identification and recording simplify usage for all coding levels.
Integration Capabilities: Interfaces with tools like Jenkins and ALM for streamlined testing.
Built-in Frameworks: Offers frameworks like BPT for accelerated test development.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Reduced Manual Testing: Minimizes the effort required for manual testing tasks.
Time Efficiency: Accelerates testing processes with user-friendly features.
Seamless Integration: Integrates with CI/CD tools, enhancing operational productivity.
Comprehensive Coverage: Automates test cases involving multiple scenarios effectively.

In industries like finance and healthcare, OpenText Functional Testing is leveraged for end-to-end automation, ensuring streamlined processes and accuracy in testing. Many companies utilize it for efficient test data management and integrating testing within continuous integration/deployment operations.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Cisco

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services

Buyer's Guide

Performance Testing Tools

October 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Perforce, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: October 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

871,358 professionals have used our research since 2012.

We monitor all Performance 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.