Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Functional Testing vs Postman Enterprise comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.8
OpenText Functional Testing boosts ROI by enhancing efficiency with AI, reducing manual efforts, and accelerating test execution time.
Sentiment score
4.1
Postman's streamlined API workflows enhance collaboration, reduce manual testing time, minimize errors, and improve productivity, leading to cost savings.
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
A minimum of 50% time is saved when comparing manual to automation.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.1
OpenText Functional Testing's customer service is praised for responsiveness, but support experiences vary in wait times and issue resolution.
Sentiment score
5.7
Postman's documentation and forums effectively resolve most issues, though some users desire improved support responsiveness and enhanced technical support.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
After creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
I appreciate the ease of using Postman, especially its desktop version, due to the features it offers such as cookie management and environment synchronization.
There is a lot of support available through forums and user groups, which has been sufficient for me.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
OpenText Functional Testing is scalable with proper license management and infrastructure, excelling in test automation scalability and integration.
Sentiment score
7.2
Postman Enterprise excels in scalability and adaptability for various teams, despite noted areas for performance improvement.
Running them in parallel allows you to consume multiple runtime licenses and just execute the tests that don't have conflicting priorities and get through a lot of volume much quicker.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
Postman does not have database validation available, which affects its scalability.
This solution is scalable.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
OpenText Functional Testing performs well on suitable hardware, but stability varies with new features and requires strategic implementation.
Sentiment score
8.0
Postman Enterprise is highly reliable, stable, and handles daily use well, with minimal issues and rare glitches.
One of the key stability issues was that Windows would consume memory without releasing it, leading to regression testing crashes.
I rate it ten out of ten for stability.
I have not experienced any issues or downtimes.
During the development phase, you will face issues, but once it goes to production, you won't face such issues.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Functional Testing is criticized for high memory usage, slow performance, poor compatibility, and requires technical skills and costly investment.
Postman Enterprise users request improved documentation, UI, integrations, automation, and pricing, while addressing compatibility, speed, and testing challenges.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.
We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing.
One of the primary challenges with Postman is handling authentication issues, especially relating to tokens and passwords.
If they can enhance it to have a database kind of validation like we have in ReadyAPI, it would be better.
Maybe Postman can be a good contender and replicate some features such as more scripting and control over API calls.
 

Setup Cost

Despite its high cost and complex pricing, OpenText Functional Testing is valued for support and features, offering flexible licenses.
Postman Enterprise offers competitive pricing with free and paid plans for various team sizes, balancing cost with features.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
Postman's pricing model includes a basic free version, which is favorable given the Professional enterprise options offered.
Postman is open-source, so the cost is minimal compared to commercial platforms.
Postman is much cheaper than the other tools.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText Functional Testing enhances automation efficiency with AI tools, platform compatibility, and support for diverse technologies.
Postman Enterprise offers user-friendly API testing with automation, collaboration, and integration features for streamlined team workflows and validation.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier.
The desktop version's features like cookie management, environment compatibility, security settings, proxy integration, and data synchronization add significant value.
It's easy to navigate because tons of documentation and examples are available.
Postman's collaboration tools, such as version control and team workspaces, are particularly useful when working with teams of three to four people.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in API Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), Test Automation Tools (3rd)
Postman Enterprise
Ranking in API Testing Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
API Management (9th), API Monitoring Software (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the API Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 11.8%, up from 10.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Postman Enterprise is 10.0%, down from 14.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Postman Enterprise10.0%
OpenText Functional Testing11.8%
Other78.2%
API Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Badari Mallireddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation becomes feasible with diverse application support and faster development
I have used UFT for web application automation, desktop application automation, and Oracle ERP automation UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use. It requires less coding, has built-in features for API testing, and most importantly, it supports more than just web…
Anagha Mahadik - PeerSpot reviewer
Solution simplifies web service testing with impressive speed and accessibility
It is very easy for me to use and I highly prefer it compared to SoapUI and other products for performing its job. It is more handy and faster. It has impacted us very nicely. Postman is used for free by us. I'm not sure if there might be a paid version for multiple users. It is a very good product used for development. It is easy to install, as well as to learn, particularly for new users, even if they are not developers. I taught my business analyst to use it. I just showed them once, and it was easy for them to understand. For example, I gave them the URL and request format and asked them to test independently. They were able to use it on their own and do their testing as well. It was a good experience, especially for generally smart people, like those we usually hire in our company. It is pretty easy to explain, and learning it is not complex.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
872,846 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
15%
Insurance Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise71
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise41
 

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...
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.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
Areas of OpenText Functional Testing that have room for improvement include having an option to store objects in the public repository when using Object Spy and adding objects, as it currently stor...
How does Postman compare with Apache JMeter?
Postman lets you easily define variables, which then get updated automatically. This is a huge time-saver and makes processes very efficient. We can also export the test cases we create and share t...
What do you like most about Postman?
The product is easy to implement.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Postman?
Postman is much cheaper than the other tools. I am not aware of the current pricing for Postman because that's taken care of by the client; we just pay and they simply create options. On a per-pers...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
PayPal, Shopify, Microsoft, Adobe, Atlassian, Twitter, BestBuy, Coursera
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing vs. Postman Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
872,846 professionals have used our research since 2012.