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 Sep 21, 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
8th
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 October 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 5.3%, up from 5.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 2.9%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
LambdaTest5.3%
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers2.9%
Other91.8%
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

"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."
"It's user-friendly and offers valuable features for testing, making it a reliable tool."
"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."
"The most valuable features are that it's essentially on-demand, and you only focus on getting the code that needs to be executed without having to worry about the OS, hardware, etc."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Stability-wise, I have not experienced any downtime or other performance issues."
"The most valuable feature is the real-time testing, which helps you to test your website on more than two thousand combinations of browsers and operating systems."
"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 is stability."
"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
"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."
"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."
"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 is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio."
 

Cons

"I've also had some issues with the speed of certain API calls and the rendering of data. For example, when I'm onboarding data, the process can be slow."
"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."
"The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting."
"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."
"The scalability is good with Amazon, but IBM had some issues."
"LambdaTest needs to improve its speed and memory because it takes a long time to load."
"It would be nice to have an API for visual regression testing."
"If possible to simulate the finger pinch, it would make it more realistic."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."
"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."
"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"LambdaTest is paid per execution."
"I used the product for free."
"The tool is not cheap, but it is not expensive."
"This is an affordable product."
"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
"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 pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"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."
"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Performing Arts
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
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: September 2025.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.