Micro Focus Service Test [EOL] vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

Micro Focus Service Test [EOL] and OpenText Functional Testing are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. Additionally, 100% of Micro Focus Service Test [EOL] users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of OpenText Functional Testing users who would recommend it.

Micro Focus Service Test [EOL]

Read 6 Micro Focus Service Test [EOL] reviews

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing

Read 98 OpenText Functional Testing reviews

8,452 Views
6,001 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Micro Focus Service Test [EOL]

OpenText Functional Testing

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

OpenText Functional Testing and Micro Focus Service Test [EOL] are both competitive in the realm of automated software testing. OpenText has the upper hand in deployment and cost, while Micro Focus provides advanced features and greater flexibility.

Features: OpenText Functional Testing offers automation tools for test creation and execution, seamless integration with OpenText solutions, and ease of use. Micro Focus Service Test [EOL] provides extensive testing frameworks, complex test scenario support, and integration options for multiple technologies.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Functional Testing could benefit from enhanced advanced feature support, deeper integration options, and more extensive documentation. Micro Focus Service Test [EOL] would improve with a more intuitive setup process, reduced learning curve, and streamlined customer support processes.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Functional Testing is known for its straightforward deployment and responsive customer service. Micro Focus Service Test [EOL], while requiring more initial setup, offers extensive documentation and training for complex scenarios.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing is attractive for its lower setup costs, offering a clear ROI through reduced operational expenses. Micro Focus Service Test [EOL] demands a higher initial investment, but its advanced features justify the cost, offering a significant long-term ROI for detailed testing solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,873 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

Micro Focus Service Test [EOL]

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

1.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Functional Testing

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (4th), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (5th)

Featured Reviews

it_user375834

VRM - Venue Results Manager at a sports company with 1,001-5,000 employees

It made it easy for the test team to monitor and measure test execution.

The most valuable features for us are Performance on execution Usage, once most of tasks are drag and drop, so you just need to drag the features during script preparation Integration with other ALM tools My team integrated test scripts from HP Service Test into HP QC ALM test management tool.…

Read full review

Kevin Copple

Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

Has supported faster test execution and increased flexibility while offering room to improve support responsiveness

Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates another day of delay to get to the level that's needed. This is a common practice across most companies where you call, you get the entry-level person, and then they work their way up to help screen calls so that they are more focused.

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

"My team integrated test scripts from HP Service Test into HP QC ALM test management tool, which made it easy for the test team to monitor and measure test execution."

"The most valuable feature is the graphical workflow."

"Service Test provides different opportunities in SOA testing, which helps us to provide better SOA solutions to clients."

"Service Test is user friendly and requires QTP developers a relatively minimal learning curve to catch up with any changes in features that may get introduced by newer versions."

"The data validation used to take a lot of time, and now through Service Test it is done within minutes."

"It has helped a lot in reducing the time that would be put in for a particular module."

"To me, the most valuable features were the OR and code compiler (VB script) to call the framework."

"I support UFT as the best solution due to the skill set needed to operate the tool."

"UFT is an expensive tool that can save you a lot of time and effort and provide great value for money if used correctly, but also turn out as ineffective related to value-for-money if used the wrong way."

"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."

"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."

"I was able to reduce regression and functional test times by 80%."

"The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."

"The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."

More OpenText Functional Testing pros

Cons

"If the license server went down, all the HPST nodes would fail their automation tests, which would bring down the entire automated test infrastructure and people would think the current build was bad."

"When an entire script is ready in the tool and there is a modification of WSDL at the final point, you need to form the code from scratch and there will be a lot of objects in the tool that wouldn't work after the inclusion of the new WSDL, which requires significant manual effort to fix."

"Its pricing is a bit high when compared to other SOA testing tools."

"They should come up with something like Fiddler to see the service status."

"Service Test technology is primarily meant to test applications without user interface therefore falling short of helping in the test of UI applications unlike QTP."

"We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing."

"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."

"This tool is good for programming experts."

"Prior to the past three years, we saw a lot of issues with stability and a lot of patching and concern from our internal customers that they couldn't rely on the tool to always be there when they needed it."

"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."

"It needs to be able to be used on Chrome, Firefox, and other browsers on Macs and not just Safari. That's a very key requirement for my organization."

"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."

"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."

More OpenText Functional Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"The tool's price is high."

"It's an expensive solution."

"The price is one aspect that could be improved."

"Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."

"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.""

"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."

"The price is reasonable."

"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."

More OpenText Functional Testing pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Manufacturing Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	20
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	71

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT One?

I'm more familiar with Functional Testing. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is a different product set that functions as an IDE for writing custom code. We don't leverage that product bec...

See all answers

Comparisons

TestingWhiz vs Micro Focus Service Test [EOL]

Compared 57% of the time

More Micro Focus Service Test [EOL] Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 17% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 5% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 5% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

March 2026

Download Micro Focus Service Test [EOL] product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing

March 2026

Download OpenText Functional Testing product report

Also Known As

Service Test, HPE Service Test

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro

Overview

Micro Focus Service Test is based on Virtual User Generator (VuGen) like Micro Focus LoadRunner software, which is code-centric and uses a technical interface that can be challenging for functional testing teams to utilize. It has also had instances of difficulty parsing some Web Services Description Languages (WSDLs) for complex services.

OpenText

OpenText Functional Testing provides automated testing with compatibility across technologies, browsers, and platforms. It targets APIs, GUIs, and applications like SAP and Oracle for efficient test automation, emphasizing usability and integration with tools such as Jenkins and ALM.

OpenText Functional Testing offers wide-ranging automation capabilities for functional and regression testing, API testing, and automation across web, desktop, and mainframe applications. It supports script recording and object identification, appealing to less technical users. Despite its advantages, it grapples with memory issues, stability concerns, and a challenging scripting environment. Its VBScript reliance limits flexibility, generating demand for enhanced language support and speed improvement. Users appreciate its role in continuous integration and deployment processes, managing test data efficiently, and reducing manual testing efforts.

What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing?

Multiplatform Compatibility: Works seamlessly across technologies, browsers, and platforms.
Automation Span: Provides automation for APIs, GUIs, SAP, and Oracle applications.
Intuitive Design: Object identification and recording simplify usage for all coding levels.
Integration Capabilities: Interfaces with tools like Jenkins and ALM for streamlined testing.
Built-in Frameworks: Offers frameworks like BPT for accelerated test development.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Reduced Manual Testing: Minimizes the effort required for manual testing tasks.
Time Efficiency: Accelerates testing processes with user-friendly features.
Seamless Integration: Integrates with CI/CD tools, enhancing operational productivity.
Comprehensive Coverage: Automates test cases involving multiple scenarios effectively.

In industries like finance and healthcare, OpenText Functional Testing is leveraged for end-to-end automation, ensuring streamlined processes and accuracy in testing. Many companies utilize it for efficient test data management and integrating testing within continuous integration/deployment operations.

OpenText

Sample Customers

John Lewis, SEED Infotech, Bajaj Allianz, TMNAS, Hexaware, Brewin Dolphin, A U.S. bank

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

March 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, BrowserStack, Worksoft and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional 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.