OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs k6 Open Source comparison

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. k6 Open Source

Download the complete report

Helped 859,129 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

k6 Open Source

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Load Testing Tools (8th), Regression Testing Tools (10th)

OpenText Functional Testing...

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (12th), Test Automation Tools (11th)

Featured Reviews

NalinGoonawardana

Principal Consultant ( Test automation - Performance testing) at TTC Global (TTC) at TTC at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

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.

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 ( /products/opentext-uft-developer-reviews ) 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 ( /products/framework-reviews ), 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

"The standout feature of k6 is its strong focus on API performance testing."

"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 most valuable feature of the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks."

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

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

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

"The most valuable features are the object repository."

"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."

"I like the tool because we can still access the devices' distance. It's not important where you're working. For example, I can use it in Brazil, Chile, and other parts where people are working. After the pandemic, many companies use it for homework. I think using it to administer and manage the devices is very good and effective."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers pros

Cons

"One area where k6 could improve is by introducing a GUI similar to JMeter."

"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."

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

"The pricing could be improved."

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

"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."

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

"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."

"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."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

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

"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."

"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."

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

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

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

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

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 Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

20%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Media Company

Financial Services Firm

19%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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?

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?

In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary. This limits the technology's ability to recognize every object.

Tricentis NeoLoad vs k6 Open Source

Comparisons

Compared 51% of the time

Apache JMeter vs k6 Open Source

Compared 15% of the time

Selenium HQ vs k6 Open Source

Compared 15% of the time

BlazeMeter vs k6 Open Source

Compared 12% of the time

Oracle Application Testing Suite vs k6 Open Source

Compared 8% of the time

More k6 Open Source Competitors

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 54% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 15% 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 3% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers Competitors

Product Reports

Load Testing Tools

Download k6 Open Source product report

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Download OpenText Functional Testing for Developers product report

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers report

Also Known As

Load Impact

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

Overview

Load Impact offers three main features:

Automated testing - Integrates into your CD pipeline with CI plug-ins or opt for full control with API/SDKs.
API testing - a powerful scripting environment where you can create as simple or complex API scenarios as you need.
Web & web app testing - easily load test your website or web app. Record user scenarios using our Chrome extension or proxy recorder and configure a test with just a few clicks - no programming required.

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

rackspace, salesforce.com, IBM, servicenow, Nasdaq, JWT

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

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. k6 Open Source