Eggplant Performance vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

The compared Keysight Technologies and OpenText solutions aren't in the same category. Keysight Technologies is ranked #16 in PTT , and holds a 2.4% mindshare in the category. OpenText is ranked #4 in FT , with an average rating of 7.8, and holds a 6.2% 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

677 Views
413 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing

Read 98 OpenText Functional Testing reviews

8,452 Views
6,001 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, Tricentis, Perforce and others in Performance Testing Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Performance Testing Tools Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Performance Testing Tools

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 885,444 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 (16th)

OpenText Functional Testing

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

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. Eggplant Performance is designed for Performance Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 2.4%, up 1.2% 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.

Performance Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Eggplant Performance	2.4%
OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional)	12.7%
Apache JMeter	11.7%
Other	73.2%

Performance Testing Tools

Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing	6.2%
Tricentis Tosca	12.0%
BrowserStack	6.8%
Other	75.0%

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

Kevin Copple

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.

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

"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."

"It's been a revelation to us in terms of its ability to assist us in exploratory testing and to integrate with our current model-driven architecture."

"Customer Service: Excellent and very personal."

"We've been really fortunate in that we've had virtually zero downtime in all the time we've been using Eggplant."

"We find the solution stable and scalable."

"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."

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

"The stop automation is a great feature."

"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."

"There's less manual testing time, so we are able to quickly resolve any IT issues."

"For test automation, it helps to speed up the testing and to speed up the software delivery, especially for HPE UFT because you have lots of test automation tools."

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

"I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."

"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."

More OpenText Functional Testing pros

Cons

"One area I can think of to improve is the usability of the reports that we get."

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

"Bugs occur fairly frequently, but they are very responsive in identifying them and scheduling them for fixes in future releases."

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

"We have to download it, then install it on our own machines and the machines sometimes aren't stable; since we have PDIs, also the UFT isn't stable and I don't know yet where the connection is."

"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."

"In terms of what could be improved, they need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user and if we're going to spread this throughout the organization, we'll need to spend a whole lot of money."

"Cost is the biggest issue with UFT. It is not cheap."

"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."

"Additionally, there are hanging issues where it becomes unresponsive, which can be improved."

"It’s in the middle and not always 100% reliable."

"We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing."

More OpenText Functional Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 pricing is competitive in India."

"The price is reasonable."

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

"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."

"The tool's price is high."

"The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."

"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."

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."

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

885,444 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Energy/Utilities Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Construction Company

Manufacturing Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	20
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	71

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Apache JMeter vs Eggplant Performance

Compared 14% of the time

OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise) vs Eggplant Performance

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs Eggplant Performance

Compared 11% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Eggplant Performance

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText Professional Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Professional) vs Eggplant Performance

Compared 10% of the time

More Eggplant Performance Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 16% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 5% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 4% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Performance Testing Tools

March 2026

Download Eggplant Performance product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing

March 2026

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

March 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, Perforce and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

885,444 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.