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

LambdaTest vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 27, 2025

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

LambdaTest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
6th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
10th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 4.7%, up from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 3.1%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
LambdaTest4.7%
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers3.1%
Other92.2%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

MJ
Head of QA at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Cross-platform testing and faster execution enhance testing efficiency
Don't worry about anything. Just go for it. There will not be an issue, as far as you know what you are buying and how you want to use it. Go for it, the platform is good. I rate the solution eight out of ten due to some areas needing improvement. I rate the overall solution eight out of ten.
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

"LambdaTest offers geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring."
"Our test execution time was reduced to 16 mins from five hours when executed in parallel on multiple VMs. This has been extremely helpful!"
"It is a scalable solution."
"In case something goes wrong at LambdaTest end, the Support team is extremely responsive to analyze any platform-related issues."
"Without a doubt, LambdaTest is one of the big reasons behind our faster deployment and better team collaboration."
"The solution is very easy to understand and has a user-friendly UI."
"HyperExecute adds significant speed to execution, enhancing the overall testing process."
"OpenText UFT Developer works well with record technology, making it valuable for recording."
"OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio."
"We have UI controls in Infragistics logic that have been identified by OpenText Functional Testing for Developers, but those controls are not supported by TestComplete, which is what I find most valuable."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"Integrates well with other products."
"The most valuable features are the object repository."
"In UFT, it's a simple click to insert the checkpoints."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
 

Cons

"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."
"There is scope for improvement in service account usage, LDAP integration, and adapting new devices and features."
"The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting."
"LambdaTest needs to improve its speed and memory because it takes a long time to load."
"I didn't like the solution's technical support and how they communicated and tried to fix the issues of customers like me."
"Performing automation testing from UI is a little slow and could be improved."
"It would be much easier for us to read the test if they provided dashboard analytics."
"The analytics over the automation dashboard can be more intuitive."
"The tool could be a little easier."
"The pricing could be improved."
"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."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"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."
"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."
"The solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is 60% cheaper and there is no fuss in maintaining the lab, so we have more time to do the testing."
"The pricing for LambdaTest is affordable, and one of the reasons we implemented it."
"It is affordable as compared to similar SaaS solutions."
"I used the product for free."
"This is an affordable product."
"From the customer side, LambdaTest is cheaper for big company usage and works fine as other similar applications."
"LambdaTest is priced well, which is why we migrated to it."
"LambdaTest is on the cloud, offers both free and paid plans which start at $19 USD per month."
"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Healthcare Company
7%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Performing Arts
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise29
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about LambdaTest?
We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LambdaTest?
The pricing of LambdaTest depends on the deal negotiated. It is cost-effective compared to competitors like BrowserStack ( /products/browserstack-reviews ) and Sauce Labs ( /products/sauce-labs-rev...
What needs improvement with LambdaTest?
The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting. There are specific use cases related to authentication and authoriz...
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

No data available
Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bringmax, Totpal, Nethhouse, Integreplanner, Cognizant, Vendisol, Clearscale, Edureka
Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Find out what your peers are saying about LambdaTest vs. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
880,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.