No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Inflectra Rapise vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 15, 2026

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
22nd
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Robotic Process Automation (RPA) (39th), AI Quality Assurance (4th)
OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
11th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Inflectra Rapise is 1.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 3.4%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers3.4%
Inflectra Rapise1.5%
Other95.1%
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

WIllWorley - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Eitan Gold - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The scripting of this tool is easy and user friendly."
"Rapise is a good automation tool that's easy to use and learn, and you can share scripts as a team, which is very helpful."
"The initial setup was straightforward; it wasn't complex at all, and we found it nice and easy."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its versatility."
"It's incredible but the support and maintenance of Inflectra Rapise's scripts is less than 30% of the effort that was involved in maintaining Selenium, it is very easy and this is the reason that we are switching everything that needs handling from Selenium to Inflectra Rapise, as it is easy to maintain and provides a benefit in cost and efforts with a 90% reduction factor in the maintenance of the scripts."
"It's pretty straightforward to set up."
"The first time I used Rapise I completed the automation scripts for a full application in a day and I was shocked how easy it was."
"We always use the product for end-to-end automation test cases."
"I believe the main feature for using it is the flexibility across different platforms."
"The solution is very scalable."
"Integrates well with other products."
"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."
"The most valuable features are the object repository."
"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."
"LeanFT integrates with our developers work-flow, so our developers can now perform automation using familiar tools, programming language, and IDE, which helps get the whole team involved in test automation."
"I would say the most valuable is that we can get people started off really quickly on solutions because we've been partners with HPE for a long time and it helps us tailor the product to our needs."
 

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."
"It has some stability issues where the tool crashes sometimes on Windows 10."
"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."
"Inflectra Rapise needs to expand its ability."
"I faced one problem where it can't validate the colour of images and text. Also, it could not automate the mobile app, and this needs to be included."
"The maintenance is very difficult."
"What I have noticed about Rapise is that sometimes when you keep on using the same script, it fails many times."
"When there are failures in a nightly run of batches of scripts, it can create a blocking situation where all the following scripts will fail due to unexpected results."
"Technical support was not very good. We do reach out, but often they're unable to help."
"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."
"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."
"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"The tool is not the problem. The problem is that we can't get the tool working, because there are other issues."
"There's room for improvement, especially when I compare OpenText to newer tools like NeoLoad."
"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where ten means very good pricing."
"We pay no more than $50 annually for support of each one of the licenses."
"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."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
915,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
19%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Construction Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise30
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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.
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...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
For functional testing, we are using OpenText Functional Testing for Developers as our product for testing. I am using the cross-browser testing capabilities of OpenText Functional Testing for Deve...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

- Soflab - RegEd - Intel - US Government
Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.