IBM Rational Test Workbench vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers comparison

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. IBM is ranked #31, while OpenText is ranked #10 with an average rating of 7.8. IBM holds a 0.9% mindshare in TAt, compared to OpenText’s 2.9% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 78% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM Rational Test Workbench

Read 4 IBM Rational Test Workbench reviews

732 Views
366 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing...

Read 39 OpenText Functional Testing for Developers reviews

2,186 Views
1,705 Comparison Views

78% willing to recommend

IBM Rational Test Workbench

OpenText Functional Testing...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

IBM Rational Test Workbench and OpenText Functional Testing for Developers are competing products in the software testing domain. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers emerges as potentially superior due to its strong feature set, while IBM Rational Test Workbench stands out in pricing and support aspects.

Features: IBM Rational Test Workbench is recognized for powerful integration capabilities, support for multiple environments, and seamless collaboration with other IBM tools. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers features comprehensive test coverage, robust automation tools, and a seamless transition between testing phases which are highly valued by developer-oriented teams.

Room for Improvement: IBM Rational Test Workbench can improve its ease of use and reduce the learning curve for new users. Enhancing real-time support and refining UI design would also benefit users. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers could expand its support for a wider range of third-party integrations and reduce the initial setup complexity. Additional user documentation may enhance user experience and troubleshooting capabilities.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Functional Testing for Developers provides straightforward deployment with effective customer service, ensuring quick integration and user-friendly guidance. IBM Rational Test Workbench offers flexible deployment options, though users may face a steeper learning curve, calling for a more intuitive setup process.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Rational Test Workbench is often associated with favorable pricing and reliable ROI, making it ideal for budget-conscious organizations. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers, while having a higher initial cost, offers superior functionalities that justify the investment for organizations focused on long-term returns through enhanced testing efficiency.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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 Rational Test Workbench

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

31st

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (18th), API Testing Tools (14th)

OpenText Functional Testing...

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

10th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (12th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of IBM Rational Test Workbench is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 2.9%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers	2.9%
IBM Rational Test Workbench	0.9%
Other	96.2%

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

reviewer1513668

IT Specialist, ITE at a government with 10,001+ employees

Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing

It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script.

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 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, 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

"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."

"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."

"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 for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."

"OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio."

"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."

"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software."

"The most valuable feature for me is the number of protocols that can be tested. It not only tests Web, but also SAP, Siebel, .Net, and even pdf."

"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."

"In UFT, it's a simple click to insert the checkpoints."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers pros

Cons

"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."

"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."

"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise."

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

"The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement."

"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."

"Stability depends on the company's infrastructure and end-to-end infrastructure. When I used the tool in my project, we had a big problem with many users using it simultaneously."

"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."

"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."

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

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It doesn't really concern me. Licensing is on a yearly basis."

"The pricing is a little bit on the higher side, although it is really good."

"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."

"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."

"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."

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

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

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

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

31%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Non Profit

University

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Performing Arts

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	12
Large Enterprise	29

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?

As of now, we don't have integration in the CI/CD pipeline, but they are supporting that as well. When your machine is in a locked state, you can even execute the Windows application automation. Mi...

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Functional Testing vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 12% of the time

Perfecto vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 12% of the time

Postman Enterprise vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 10% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 9% of the time

Katalon Studio vs IBM Rational Test Workbench

Compared 9% of the time

More IBM Rational Test Workbench Competitors

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 20% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 7% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 4% of the time

IBM DevOps Test UI vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Performance Testing Tools

January 2026

Download IBM Rational Test Workbench product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

January 2026

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers report

Download OpenText Functional Testing for Developers product report

Also Known As

Rational Test Workbench, IBM Rational Performance Tester, IBM Functional Tester, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server

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

Overview

IBM Rational Test Workbench provides a comprehensive test automation solution for mobile applications, regression testing, integration technologies and performance and scalability testing. It helps you build intelligent and interconnected enterprise applications that can be deployed on traditional and cloud infrastructures. With Rational Test Workbench, you can significantly reduce test cycle times, moving integration testing earlier in the development lifecycle.

IBM

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers offers robust automation capabilities with support for complex algorithms, multi-platform testing, and developer-friendly integration using C# and Java, facilitating seamless testing transitions and efficient automation workflows.

This testing tool is highly valued for its integration with ALM and Jenkins, along with its developer-focused environment adaptable to Eclipse and Visual Studio. With AI-based object recognition, an object repository, and test framework integration, it bolsters DevOps practices while reducing IT workloads. Supporting UFT to LeanFT transition, it caters to SAP, Java, .NET environments, and more. Enhanced with stable automation, extensive protocol support, and both on-premises and cloud deployments, it targets performance, regression, and functional testing, while recording and screengrabs enhance automation capabilities. Future improvements could include expanded browser compatibility, enhanced JavaScript and mobile support, and better object recognition.

What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers?

Complex Algorithm Handling: Manages complex scenarios with ease, including fuzzy logic.
Developer-friendly: Enables coding in C# and Java, integrating seamlessly with popular IDEs.
AI-based Object Recognition: Enhances test automation through advanced object identification.
Extensive Protocol Support: Supports a wide range of protocols for diverse testing requirements.
Seamless Integration: Connects effortlessly with ALM and Jenkins, promoting continuous development.

What benefits can users expect when evaluating OpenText Functional Testing?

Efficient Test Automation: Streamlines test processes, optimizing resource allocation and reducing effort.
Multi-platform Flexibility: Facilitates cross-platform testing, accommodating desktop, web, and banking applications.
Reduced IT Workload: Simplifies automation tasks, decreasing the strain on IT resources.
Enhanced DevOps Support: Integrates well with DevOps practices for continuous testing advancements.

Organizations implement OpenText Functional Testing for complex test automation on desktop, web, and banking applications, supporting performance, regression, and functionality testing across environments like SAP, Java, and .NET. UFT aids in GUI, infrastructure, and ERP application automation, with deployment options including on-premises and cloud implementations. Enhanced screengrabs and recording features aid in practical test case development, while addressing emerging technology needs is a focus.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Financial Insurance Management Corp.

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

Buyer's Guide

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

January 2026

Free Report: IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Rational Test Workbench vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers report.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Automation 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.