We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

Inflectra Rapise vs Micro Focus UFT Developer comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Inflectra Rapise vs. Micro Focus UFT Developer and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
566,121 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"We always use the product for end-to-end automation test cases.""It's pretty straightforward to set up."

More Inflectra Rapise Pros →

"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.""The most valuable feature is stability.""The most valuable features are the object repository.""Integrates well with other products.""The cost is the most important factor in this tool.""The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application.""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."

More Micro Focus UFT Developer Pros →

Cons
"The maintenance is very difficult. We've only been using the platform for three months, so I'm not sure if that will continue, but right now it's an observation I've had.""It would be good if there could be more integration of Inflectra Rapise, since not all customers use the same tool for test management and automation integration."

More Inflectra Rapise Cons →

"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.""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.""Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful.""In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable.""I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability.""The pricing could be improved.""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
  • "We pay no more than $50 annually for support of each one of the licenses."
  • More Inflectra Rapise Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "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."
  • "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."
  • More Micro Focus UFT Developer Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    566,121 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: 
    We always use the product for end-to-end automation test cases.
    Top Answer: 
    We pay for the licensing of the product. For Inflectra Rapise this is on-premises. The Spira Team is Cloud-based. While the subscription cost is monthly, we pay in advance for the entire year. The… more »
    Top Answer: 
    The solution is integrated well with the Spira Team. Even so, it would be good if there could be more integration of Inflectra Rapise, since not all customers use the same tool for test management and… more »
    Top Answer: 
    The issue with all the integration is that it can become very costly and expensive and we'd like to be able to recommend one single tool that will do it all.
    Ranking
    17th
    Views
    460
    Comparisons
    289
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    959
    Rating
    8.0
    8th
    Views
    5,322
    Comparisons
    3,783
    Reviews
    10
    Average Words per Review
    623
    Rating
    7.2
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Rapise
    UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
    Learn More
    Overview
    Rapise is the most powerful and easy to use test automation tool on the market. It allows you to quickly and easily automate the testing of your web, mobile and desktop applications. Why spend hours manually regression testing your applications when you can have Rapise do it for you?

    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 Inflectra Rapise
    Learn more about Micro Focus UFT Developer
    Sample Customers
    - Soflab - RegEd - Intel - US Government
    Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company27%
    Comms Service Provider24%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Insurance Company7%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Comms Service Provider14%
    Healthcare Company9%
    Computer Software Company9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company31%
    Financial Services Firm12%
    Comms Service Provider11%
    Insurance Company7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business43%
    Midsize Enterprise29%
    Large Enterprise29%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business3%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise76%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business9%
    Midsize Enterprise5%
    Large Enterprise86%
    Find out what your peers are saying about Inflectra Rapise vs. Micro Focus UFT Developer and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
    566,121 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Inflectra Rapise is ranked 17th in Test Automation Tools with 2 reviews while Micro Focus UFT Developer is ranked 8th in Test Automation Tools with 8 reviews. Inflectra Rapise is rated 8.0, while Micro Focus UFT Developer is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Inflectra Rapise writes "Enables us to automate functional testing of end-to-end test cases for evaluating the impact on the databases ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus UFT Developer writes "Great features with good stability and an easy initial setup". Inflectra Rapise is most compared with SmartBear TestComplete, UiPath, froglogic Squish, Katalon Studio and Selenium HQ, whereas Micro Focus UFT Developer is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, Silk Test and Visual Studio Test Professional. See our Inflectra Rapise vs. Micro Focus UFT Developer report.

    See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing 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.