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 Jun 19, 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
5th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
11th
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 August 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 5.7%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 2.8%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Dinesh Saharan - PeerSpot reviewer
The tool reduces the manual effort needed and helps automate certain tasks for users
I won't be able to comment on what could be improved in the solution since I am not the one who handles LambdaTest. It is our company's IT team that takes care of LambdaTest. Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis. If something is perfect, it doesn't mean that it doesn't need to improvise or improve, like in terms of adding new features. There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time.
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 support docs are precise and you can get started with them easily."
"Stability-wise, I have not experienced any downtime or other performance issues."
"Geolocation testing is as straightforward as ticking checkboxes of browsers, operating systems, and countries."
"The solution is very easy to understand and has a user-friendly UI."
"LambdaTest easily integrates with leading project management, bug tracking, and CI-CD tools like Jira, Asana, Jenkins, Circle CI, and more."
"HyperExecute adds significant speed to execution, enhancing the overall testing process."
"The slow nature of a cloud platform was compensated with parallel testing, and now we are able to finish our testing job faster than it was before COVID."
"LambdaTest offers geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"The solution is very scalable."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"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."
"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."
"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."
"The most valuable features are the object repository."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software."
"Integrates well with other products."
 

Cons

"I would like to see all of the features available in the freemium plan so that I can test them."
"The scalability is good with Amazon, but IBM had some issues."
"If possible to simulate the finger pinch, it would make it more realistic."
"Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis...There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time."
"We get logged out of the devices if there is some inactivity."
"I didn't like the solution's technical support and how they communicated and tried to fix the issues of customers like me."
"I think Lambdatest is a valuable tool for our team and things that have room for improvement would be mobile app testing, as it can be an important addition to the tool."
"Load flow compared to other stacks needs improvement."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."
"There's room for improvement, especially when I compare OpenText to newer tools like NeoLoad."
"The tool could be a little easier."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"LambdaTest is priced well, which is why we migrated to it."
"It is free to start, which means you can actually see how it works and then take the decision to buy."
"The pricing could be made cheaper."
"The pricing for LambdaTest is affordable, and one of the reasons we implemented it."
"It is affordable as compared to similar SaaS solutions."
"It is 60% cheaper and there is no fuss in maintaining the lab, so we have more time to do the testing."
"The tool is not cheap, but it is not expensive."
"From the customer side, LambdaTest is cheaper for big company usage and works fine as other similar applications."
"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 licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
"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."
"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
"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."
"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Educational Organization
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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: July 2025.
865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.