We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT Developer and ReadyAPI based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us."
"Integrates well with other products."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"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 most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."
"One of the important features, which speeds up the automation testing development with LeanFT, is its object repository functions. Object identification are the most time-consuming aspect of building automation tests. LeanFT gives that out of the box. It helps you identify the objects and after that, once you got the object in place, then it's just about building the test scripts. So it reduces your development time significantly."
"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities."
"The two most valuable features we use are the functional test and the security test."
"I haven't seen any other tool that offers both types of tests. This is very helpful for us, and it's one of the main reasons why we chose this service."
"Reporting is more robust than other products because test reports can be exported in multiple ways."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."
"A single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and service actualization."
"When we are doing API testing we have found it to be very efficient to receive results. Additionally, you are able to do tests directly from the API."
"ReadyAPI's best features are that it's user-friendly and its behavior-driven development is flexible."
"The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement."
"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."
"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."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."
"The initial setup could be less complex."
"The UI should be flexible. Currently, the UI isn't."
"Sometimes, if I changed something in ReadyAPI, it would not quickly pick up the change. It used to give me the same error repeatedly, and when I closed the application completely and restarted it, it would pick up that change."
"It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today. Other solutions have an in-built mechanism where I can directly and easily connect. An API is more around a user submitting a request on the frontend. It then hits the backend, puts the data, and responds back. If I am hitting MongoDB or NoSQL databases, I do not have ready-made inbuilt solutions in ReadyAPI that can easily help me in automating it faster. In our organization, we deal with NoSQL databases, and therefore, we need Groovy. We just cannot have a connector from ReadyAPI to do that. I have to write Groovy scripts. If you have themes that are predominantly using MongoDB, it leads to more maintenance and support activity because we are introducing more code into our commission. In terms of additional features, it can have cloud support. This is one of the things where we are getting into cloud support. We'll see how it works, but it is one of the doubts that we still have."
"Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions."
"If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful."
"The Property Transfer capability could be more user friendly because it is a bit difficult to understand."
"ReadyAPI's customer support isn't that great, particularly their response time."
OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 16th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while ReadyAPI is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 33 reviews. OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4, while ReadyAPI is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI writes "Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper". OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, froglogic Squish and Original Software TestDrive, whereas ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, ReadyAPI Test, Tricentis Tosca and SmartBear TestComplete. See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. ReadyAPI report.
See our list of best Functional 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.
