Inflectra Rapise vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers comparison

Inflectra and OpenText are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. Inflectra is ranked #20 with an average rating of 4.0, while OpenText is ranked #11 with an average rating of 7.8. Inflectra holds a 0.3% mindshare in TAt, compared to OpenText’s 2.6% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of Inflectra users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 78% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Inflectra Rapise

Read 7 Inflectra Rapise reviews

619 Views
198 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing...

Read 39 OpenText Functional Testing for Developers reviews

1,966 Views
1,612 Comparison Views

78% willing to recommend

Inflectra Rapise

OpenText Functional Testing...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

Inflectra Rapise and OpenText Functional Testing are competing products in the testing solutions category. Inflectra Rapise has the upper hand in pricing and support, while OpenText Functional Testing appears superior in advanced features and perceived value.

Features: Inflectra Rapise offers flexibility in handling a wide range of applications, including web, mobile, and desktop testing. It provides efficient scriptless testing capabilities and integrates with robust test management tools. OpenText Functional Testing provides extensive automation options and supports complex, high-volume testing environments, making it suitable for enterprise-level operations.

Room for Improvement: Inflectra Rapise could enhance its scalability for larger enterprise environments and improve automation in high-volume testing scenarios. Additionally, adding more advanced features to compete with enterprise-level solutions would be beneficial. OpenText Functional Testing could improve its simplicity in deployment, offer easier integration for small teams, and optimize resource usage to enhance accessibility for those with limited technical expertise.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Inflectra Rapise provides a straightforward deployment model appreciated by smaller teams and offers accessible customer service. In contrast, OpenText Functional Testing has a more complex deployment process requiring more resources but is supported by comprehensive documentation and responsive technical guidance.

Pricing and ROI: Inflectra Rapise features a competitive setup cost, offering strong ROI through its lower initial investment and flexibility in adapting to various project needs. OpenText Functional Testing comes with a higher setup cost but justifies its price with extensive features designed for large-scale applications, leading to potentially higher ROI for enterprise scenarios.

To learn more, read our detailed Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 873,003 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

Inflectra Rapise

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

20th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Robotic Process Automation (RPA) (31st)

OpenText Functional Testing...

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

11th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (12th)

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Inflectra Rapise is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 2.6%, up from 2.7% 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	2.6%
Inflectra Rapise	0.3%
Other	97.1%

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

WIllWorley

Software Consultant at The New Humanitarian

The tool needs to improve in the areas of security, though it is a versatile product

Inflectra Rapise needs to expand its ability. I spoke with Inflectra's executive account rep on the need to expand the tool's ability. The problem with Inflectra Rapise is that a lot of companies are still using SAP GUI. Inflectra has no intention of building Rapise in a way that allows it to interact with SAP GUI. Inflectra Rapise has very limited value for the companies I work with because they they still use SAP GUI since their top priority is SAP testing, and they want to get into automation, for which they need a tool that cannot only used to automate processes, but can also do end-to-end testing where you are not only using SAP GUI, but you are using the interface with old legacy systems that are still in use or with today's more modern technologies. In the future, the tool needs to increase its versatility. If I am at a company that uses 23 different technologies, like .NET Visual Basic, Oracle, SQL, or whatever, Inflectra Rapise needs to be made as a product that is an out-of-the-box usable tool for any technology.

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

"It's pretty straightforward to set up."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its versatility."

"We always use the product for end-to-end automation test cases."

"Integrates well with other products."

"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 cost is the most important factor in this tool."

"OpenText UFT Developer works well with record technology, making it valuable for recording."

"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."

"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."

"The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers pros

Cons

"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."

"Inflectra Rapise needs to expand its ability."

"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."

"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."

"The pricing could be improved."

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

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

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

"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."

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

"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We pay no more than $50 annually for support of each one of the licenses."

"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where ten means very good pricing."

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

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

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

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

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

"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 pricing is quite high compared to the competition."

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

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

873,003 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

25%

Government

17%

Comms Service Provider

13%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

20%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

Performing Arts

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	2

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

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Inflectra Rapise?

The most valuable feature of the solution is its versatility.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Inflectra Rapise?

I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where ten means very good pricing.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Inflectra Rapise?

See all answers

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

Automation Anywhere vs Inflectra Rapise

Compared 100% of the time

More Inflectra Rapise Competitors

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 39% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 11% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 5% of the time

Wikidi Testomato vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra Rapise

October 2025

Download Inflectra Rapise product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

October 2025

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers report

Download OpenText Functional Testing for Developers product report

Also Known As

Rapise

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

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?

Inflectra

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

- Soflab - RegEd - Intel - US Government

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

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

September 2025

Free Report: Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Find out what your peers are saying about Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

873,003 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Inflectra Rapise 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.