IBM DevOps Test UI vs OpenText UFT Developer comparison

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. IBM is ranked #29, while OpenText is ranked #12 with an average rating of 7.8. IBM holds a 0.7% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText’s 2.6% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 77% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM DevOps Test UI

Read 8 IBM DevOps Test UI reviews

604 Views
229 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Developer

Read 38 OpenText UFT Developer reviews

1,679 Views
1,028 Comparison Views

77% willing to recommend

IBM DevOps Test UI

OpenText UFT Developer

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

IBM DevOps Test UI and OpenText UFT Developer are competing in the automated testing solutions market. IBM DevOps Test UI has the upper hand in pricing and support, while OpenText UFT Developer outshines with its feature set, appealing to those prioritizing rich functionality.

Features: IBM DevOps Test UI is notable for integration capabilities, scalability, and continuous testing tools. OpenText UFT Developer excels with extensive cross-platform support, a comprehensive scripting environment, and AI-driven testing features.

Room for Improvement: IBM DevOps Test UI could benefit from enhanced AI testing capabilities, more diverse scripting environments, and improved cross-platform compatibility. OpenText UFT Developer might improve with more personalized customer support, simpler deployment for traditional DevOps settings, and reduced initial costs.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM DevOps Test UI offers flexible deployment that fits seamlessly into DevOps environments, backed by attentive service. OpenText UFT Developer provides solid deployment options with a less tailored support approach, focusing on comprehensive but sometimes generic assistance.

Pricing and ROI: IBM DevOps Test UI is known for lower setup costs, leading to faster ROI and clear support. OpenText UFT Developer's higher initial cost is offset by its extensive features and long-term benefits, attracting those ready to invest for advanced capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer

May 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 856,873 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

IBM DevOps Test UI

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

29th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (13th)

OpenText UFT Developer

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

12th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Automation Tools (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 0.7%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.6%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Hellen Zhang

Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada

Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support

The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework. The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run. The reason is that changes were made to how it works with the browser and the startup takes some time. Adjusting those changes to speed up the load time will improve the solution.

Read full review

Eitan Gold

SQA Manager at Elmo Motion Control Ltd.

User-friendly integration with support for Visual Studio enhances GUI testing capabilities

OpenText UFT Developer ( /products/opentext-uft-developer-reviews ) is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio. The support is excellent. It is easy to implement tests with OpenText UFT Developer. We primarily use it for GUI testing and testing web applications with another application. This is the main usage for us. We also integrate it with the N-unit Framework ( /products/framework-reviews ), and they work well together.

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 most valuable feature is the UI component tester."

"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."

"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."

"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."

"The most valuable features are the object repository."

"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."

"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."

"Integrates well with other products."

"The most valuable feature is stability."

"One of the important features, which speeds up the automation testing development with LeanFT, is its object repository functions. Object identification are the most time-consuming aspect of building automation tests. LeanFT gives that out of the box. It helps you identify the objects and after that, once you got the object in place, then it's just about building the test scripts. So it reduces your development time significantly."

"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."

"The solution is very scalable."

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

Cons

"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."

"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."

"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."

"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."

"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."

"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."

"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."

"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."

"There's room for improvement, especially when I compare OpenText to newer tools like NeoLoad."

"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."

"The solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites."

"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."

More OpenText UFT Developer cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."

"When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."

"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."

"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."

"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."

"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."

"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."

"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."

More OpenText UFT Developer pricing and cost advice

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

856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

27%

Financial Services Firm

16%

Real Estate/Law Firm

10%

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

20%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Developer?

There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?

The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?

In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary. This limits the technology's ability to recognize every object.

See all answers

Comparisons

Selenium HQ vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 37% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 26% of the time

HCL OneTest vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 22% of the time

More IBM DevOps Test UI Competitors

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 57% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 17% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText UFT Developer Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

May 2025

Download IBM DevOps Test UI product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer

May 2025

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

Also Known As

IBM Rational Functional Tester

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT

Overview

IBM DevOps Test UI, also known as Rational Functional Tester, is a software tool designed for automated functional and regression testing of Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) and data-driven testing. It automates the testing process to ensure application functionalities work as intended and identifies any issues caused by new code changes. The tool is tailored for GUI testing, allowing for easy recording and playback of test cases that interact with UI elements like buttons and menus. It supports data-driven testing, enabling comprehensive tests across various data sets. Additionally, it offers visual editing features with screenshot representations for easy test creation and ScriptAssure technology to maintain test scripts even if the UI changes.

IBM

With OpenText UFT Developer, you get object identification tools, parallel testing, and record/replay capabilities.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Edumate

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines

Buyer's Guide

IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer

May 2025

Free Report: IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.