OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise vs OpenText UFT One comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Performance Testing Tools Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The most beneficial features of the solution are flexibility and versatility in their performance.""I think the number one feature everybody likes is the capability to easily generate virtual users as well as the reporting.""The most valuable part of the product is the way you can scale the basic testing easily.""We can measure metrics like hits per second and detect deviations or issues through graphs. We can filter out response times based on timings and identify spikes in the database or AWS reports.""The user interface is fine.""It allows you to work out how well you are doing project-wise because you see the number of scripts done, the number of tests run, and whether you have mapped all your requirements to it.""This product is better oriented to large, enterprise-oriented organizations.""The most valuable feature is the Vuser protocols."

More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pros →

"It offers a wide range of testing.""The stop automation is a great feature.""It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people.""The initial setup is relatively easy.""It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback.""The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation.""Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test.""I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."

More OpenText UFT One Pros →

Cons
"The worst thing about it is it did not have zero footprint on your PC.""Lacks the option of carrying out transaction comparisons.""The support team needs to be more coordinated.""The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability.""The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming.""The price of this solution could be less expensive. However, this category of solutions is expensive.""The TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved.""I believe the data that demonstrates the automated correlations should be corrected."

More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Cons →

"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function.""UFT has a recording feature. They could make the recording feature window bigger for whatever activities that I am recording. It would improve the user experience if they could create a separate floating panel (or have it automatically show on the side) once the recording starts.""I am not sure if they have a vision of how they want to position the leads in the market, because if you look at Tosca, Tosca is one of the automation tools that have a strategy, and it recently updated its strategy with SAP. They are positioning them as a type of continuous testing automation tool. And if you notice Worksoft, particularly the one tool for your enterprise application, your Worksoft is positioning. I am not sure if Micro Focus UFT has a solid strategy in place. They must differentiate themselves so that people recognize Micro Focus UFT for that reason.""We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work.""They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost.""We'd like it to have less scripting.""I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications.""The solution is expensive."

More OpenText UFT One Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "For Performance Center, you have to add additional load generators, and then you can do more. I think it is a matter of the price, in terms of how many machines you can buy."
  • "It does everything you could hope for in a performance testing solution. It's not cheap."
  • "It is a bit expensive when compared with other tools."
  • "ROI is 200%."
  • "It is a bit expensive, especially for smaller organizations, but over-all it can save you money."
  • "The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year."
  • "They have a much more practical pricing model now."
  • "I have not been directly involved in price negotiations but my understanding is that while the cost is a little bit high, it provides good value for the money."
  • More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
  • "The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
  • "It's an expensive solution."
  • "For the price of five automation licenses, you simply would not be able to hire five manual testers for two years worth of 24/7 manual testing work on demand."
  • "The price is only $3,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company. Probably no more than five or 10. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't see that being an issue."
  • "The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""
  • "The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."
  • "The price is one aspect that could be improved."
  • More OpenText UFT One Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The tool is very easy to set up and get running.
    Top Answer:OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise needs to improve reporting.
    Top Answer:We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well… more »
    Top Answer:My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.
    Top Answer:The product wasn't easy for developers to learn and pick up in the area revolving around scripting for automation, and there was a lot of resistance from developers, causing my company to rely on… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    4,638
    Comparisons
    2,652
    Reviews
    27
    Average Words per Review
    632
    Rating
    8.4
    2nd
    Views
    11,757
    Comparisons
    7,234
    Reviews
    20
    Average Words per Review
    694
    Rating
    7.9
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Performance Center, Micro Focus Performance Center, HPE Performance Center
    Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)
    Learn More
    Overview

    Your globally distributed performance testing teams have the responsibility of driving quality acrossyour enterprise while testing a broad range of application types, managing costs and deploying applications that meet the performance requirements of your business. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise delivers a collaborative testing platform that reduces complexity, centralizes resources and leverages shared assets and licenses to increase consistency across your enterprise.

    Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications. Read white paper
    Sample Customers
    Hexaware, British Sky Broadcasting, JetBlue
    Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Computer Software Company19%
    Retailer11%
    Energy/Utilities Company11%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Computer Software Company16%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Insurance Company8%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company16%
    Insurance Company10%
    Healthcare Company10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm19%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business11%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise80%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise76%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise70%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise75%
    Buyer's Guide
    Performance Testing Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews. OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and BlazeMeter, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite.

    We monitor all Performance Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.