Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs k6 Open Source comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

k6 Open Source
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (7th), Regression Testing Tools (9th)
OpenText Functional Testing...
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (12th), Test Automation Tools (11th)
 

Featured Reviews

NalinGoonawardana - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers good scalability and has the ability to integrate with various systems and services
One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter. While k6 is a powerful tool for performance testing, it leans heavily towards coding. Having a GUI, even if it is a low-code approach, could make it more accessible to a broader audience. It would be beneficial to strike a balance where basic tasks can be performed graphically through a user-friendly interface, while still allowing the flexibility for more complex operations through code, similar to how JMeter operates. This could enhance the user experience and make k6 more approachable for those who may not be as comfortable with scripting.
Eitan Gold - PeerSpot reviewer
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 tool's big advantage is that it is more performance-test oriented for experienced testers who know what they are doing. In a normal working setup, performance engineers frequently work with DevOps and development teams. For these teams, k6 Open Source's syntax is much simpler and easier to understand and apply in the working process."
"The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."
"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."
"OpenText UFT Developer works well with record technology, making it valuable for recording."
"The most valuable features are the object repository."
"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"It is a product that can meet regulations of the banking industry."
 

Cons

"One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter."
"The support for .NET Framework and Visual Studio in Micro Focus UFT Developer is currently limited. At present, only Visual Studio 2019 is supported, despite the release of a newer version (2022). Similarly, the tool only supports up to .NET Framework version 4.3.8, while there have been six newer versions released. This is an area that could be improved upon, particularly in the Windows environment."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."
"The tool could be a little easier."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary. This limits the technology's ability to recognize every object."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
"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 licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
"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 Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
Performing Arts
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise29
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about k6 Open Source?
The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing.
What needs improvement with k6 Open Source?
One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter. While k6 is a powerful tool for performance testing, it leans heavily towards coding. Having a GUI, even if it is a low-co...
What is your primary use case for k6 Open Source?
k6 Open Source is a powerful tool, especially for API-level performance testing. Its integration capabilities and ease of use make it promising for a wider audience.
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.
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...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

rackspace, salesforce.com, IBM, servicenow, Nasdaq, JWT
Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. k6 Open Source and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.