OpenText UFT One vs Oracle Application Testing Suite comparison

OpenText and Oracle are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 7.7, while Oracle is ranked #25. OpenText holds a 9.9% mindshare in FT, compared to Oracle’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of Oracle users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT One

Read 96 OpenText UFT One reviews

6,736 Views
4,304 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Oracle Application Testing ...

Read 24 Oracle Application Testing Suite reviews

898 Views
531 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

Oracle Application Testing ...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

OpenText UFT One and Oracle Application Testing Suite compete in the software testing category. Based on features and compatibility, OpenText UFT One holds an advantage due to its broader testing capabilities across various applications and platforms, whereas Oracle Application Testing Suite specializes in Oracle environments.

Features: OpenText UFT One offers extensive compatibility with various applications, including GUI testing and API testing. It supports numerous technologies and provides high-end automation frameworks. Oracle Application Testing Suite provides robust functional and load testing, especially for Oracle applications, with a detailed interface and performance testing capabilities.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT One users point to its resource-heavy nature and the need for better CI/CD integration. Some find it sluggish at times and costly. Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve in desktop application automation, setup simplicity, and browser compatibility, particularly for recent browser versions.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText UFT One can be deployed both on-premises and in private clouds, requiring significant initial setup. Mixed customer service reviews highlight response time issues. Oracle Application Testing Suite is often on-premises with hybrid cloud options, receiving favorable customer service feedback, especially for Oracle-centric setups, though technical support could be more efficient.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One is considered expensive, with various licensing options impacting budgets. Its ROI is often realized through increased efficiency in testing. Oracle Application Testing Suite offers competitive pricing, particularly when bundled with other Oracle solutions, providing good ROI for Oracle-focused enterprises through effective automation with minimal costs.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 850,900 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

OpenText UFT One

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (3rd)

Oracle Application Testing ...

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

25th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (14th), Load Testing Tools (15th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 9.9%, up from 9.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.2%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Don Ingerson

Sr. QA Automation Engineer at a manufacturing company with 11-50 employees

With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results

With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files. For Web browsers, UFT 12.54 supports IE9, IE10, IE11, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome (versions 31.0 to 54.9), Firefox (versions 27.0 to 49.0). Besides GUI testing, UFT supports database testing and API testing (Docker, WSDL, and SOAP). For the first time ever, HP started to expand the testing capabilities of UFT (QTP) beyond Windows beginning with UFT 12.00. A UFT user can now run tests on Web applications on a Safari browser that is running on a remote Mac computer.

Read full review

Rishabh-Sharma

Senior Engineer at Cignity Technology

Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy

Oracle Application Testing Suite can improve by covering more browsers as compared to other solutions because they're considering the Edge browser as well, but the solution is working on different Windows operating platforms. For example, in our current Windows 2012 R2 server, if I want to automate the Edge browser, I need to upgrade that particular Windows to Windows 10.1 or some other Windows platform, because it's not supported in Windows 2012 feature. That is an issue. If cross-browsers can be incorporated, then support should be provided. There should be a single operating system where everything can be incorporated. I have faced issues with some indexing items. For example, the solution is able to derive some properties from the screen, such as button locations or text locations, but there are some elements, for example, unnamed buttons or text, where there is no name or ID or any other identifying information. Indexing doesn't always work, and we have to go to those elements manually and inspect them to determine their class, and then input that information into the system.

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

"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."

"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."

"One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA."

"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."

"It is a stable solution."

"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."

"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."

"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT One is you are able to use it with many other technologies. I have not had an instance where the solution was not able to automate or execute automation. I was able to use COBOL to manage some automation."

More OpenText UFT One pros

"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."

"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."

"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"

"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."

"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."

"The function test feature is valuable."

"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."

"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."

More Oracle Application Testing Suite pros

Cons

"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."

"The solution is expensive."

"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."

"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."

"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."

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

"The solution does not have proper scripting."

"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."

More OpenText UFT One cons

"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."

"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."

"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."

"I have faced issues with some indexing items."

"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."

"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."

"I would like to see better dashboards."

"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."

More Oracle Application Testing Suite cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing of the product is 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 price is one aspect that could be improved."

"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."

"HPE recently extended the demo license period from 30 days to 60 days which was a very wise and popular decision to give potential customers more time to install it and try it for free. Even if your company has a salesperson come in and demo UFT, I would highly encourage at least one of your developers or automation engineers to download and install it to explore for themselves the functionality and features included during the demo trial period."

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."

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

"It's an expensive solution."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."

"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."

"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."

"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."

"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."

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

850,900 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

17%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

17%

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

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 do you like most about Micro Focus UFT One?

My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?

OpenText UFT One required knowledge of VBScript, which is a limited version of Visual Basic. We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory ...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 31% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 12% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 8% of the time

OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 2% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 35% of the time

Apache JMeter vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 10% of the time

SoftLogica WAPT Pro vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 6% of the time

k6 Open Source vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 6% of the time

More Oracle Application Testing Suite Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

April 2025

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Buyer's Guide

Oracle Application Testing Suite

April 2025

Download Oracle Application Testing Suite product report

Also Known As

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

OATS

Overview

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

OpenText

Application Testing Suite is a comprehensive, integrated testing solution that ensures the quality, scalability, and availability of your Web applications, Web Services, packaged Oracle Applications and Oracle databases.

Oracle

Sample Customers

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

Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite

April 2025

Free Report: OpenText UFT One vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

850,900 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT One vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite report.

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.