IBM Rational Functional Tester vs Micro Focus UFT Developer comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Functional Tester and Micro Focus UFT Developer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, SeleniumHQ, Micro Focus and others in Functional Testing Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: October 2022).
654,218 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."

More IBM Rational Functional Tester Pros →

"Integrates well with other products.""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 solution is very scalable.""This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us.""The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application.""The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software.""The most valuable features are the object repository."

More Micro Focus UFT Developer Pros →

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

More IBM Rational Functional Tester Cons →

"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise.""The price of the solution could improve.""I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability.""The pricing could be improved.""In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure.""UFT Developer is good, but it requires high-level development skills. Scripting is something that everybody should know to be able to work with this product. Currently, it is very development intensive, and you need to know various scripting languages. It would be good if the development effort could be cut short, and it can be scriptless like Tosca. It will help in more adoption because not every team has people with a software engineering background. If it is scriptless, the analysts who wear multiple hats and come from different backgrounds can also use it in a friendly manner. It is also quite expensive.""With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."

More Micro Focus UFT Developer Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • "The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
  • More Micro Focus UFT Developer Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    654,218 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:RFT needs to think from a contemporary point of view — from the current context. They need to look at the way they're positioning the tool. They need to do a complete revamp so that even a… more »
    Top Answer:Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time.
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software.
    Top Answer:The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license.
    Ranking
    25th
    Views
    2,435
    Comparisons
    1,426
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    225
    Rating
    8.0
    16th
    Views
    5,020
    Comparisons
    3,274
    Reviews
    6
    Average Words per Review
    642
    Rating
    7.3
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Rational Functional Tester
    UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
    Learn More
    Overview
    IBM Rational Functional Tester is an automated functional testing and regression testing tool. This software provides automated testing capabilities for functional, regression, GUI, and data-driven testing. Rational Function Tester supports a range of applications, such as web-based, .Net, Java, Siebel, SAP, terminal emulator-based applications, PowerBuilder, Ajax, Adobe Flex, Dojo Toolkit, GEF, Adobe PDF documents, zSeries, iSeries, and pSeries.

    Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT) is a powerful yet lightweight functional test automation solution, that supports a wide range of AUT technologies. Targeted to technical test automation engineers and developers/testers in Agile teams, Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT) is fully embedded in standard IDEs and integrates naturally with the Dev and QA ecosystems.

    Offer
    Learn more about IBM Rational Functional Tester
    Learn more about Micro Focus UFT Developer
    Sample Customers
    Edumate
    Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Comms Service Provider12%
    Government9%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm17%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Insurance Company9%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Healthcare Company7%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business11%
    Midsize Enterprise33%
    Large Enterprise56%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise65%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business3%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise77%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise75%
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    October 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, SeleniumHQ, Micro Focus and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: October 2022.
    654,218 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    IBM Rational Functional Tester is ranked 25th in Functional Testing Tools with 1 review while Micro Focus UFT Developer is ranked 16th in Functional Testing Tools with 7 reviews. IBM Rational Functional Tester is rated 8.0, while Micro Focus UFT Developer is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Functional Tester writes "Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus UFT Developer writes "Great features with good stability and an easy initial setup". IBM Rational Functional Tester is most compared with Selenium HQ, Micro Focus UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, SmartBear TestComplete and Silk Test, whereas Micro Focus UFT Developer is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, Visual Studio Test Professional, Selenium HQ and HCL OneTest.

    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.