We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and SmartBear TestComplete based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Regression Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"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."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
"It offers a wide range of testing."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"It's simple to set up."
"Runs in different remote machines. We have multiple versions of the software being tested."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."
"The product has many features."
"When compared to other tools, it is very simple."
"The solution is mainly stable."
"The ability to run a whole suite of tests automatically (which we did overnight)."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."
"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The code editor, though following eclipse-style, is still a work in progress and gives a very poorly formatted code once viewed via other editing tools."
"One notable drawback is the absence of native integration with Git."
"It is very hard to read the test log generated by TestComplete Executor if the log file is very big. TestComplete Executor is a small tool for just running the TestComplete test framework (not for developing)."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
"Right now, when you buy the solution, you need to pay for one solution. You receive one set up and you install it and it's just in that one machine. It would be ideal if they could offer one subscription where you can connect to different machines with a group subscription."
"SmartBear products generally have a weak link when it comes to integration with other test management tools like Inflectra."
"The pricing is the constraint."
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Regression Testing Tools with 89 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 6th in Regression Testing Tools with 70 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 7.6. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "A stable product that needs to improve its integration capabilities with other test management tools". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, UiPath Test Suite and Ranorex Studio, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Ranorex Studio, froglogic Squish and Eggplant Test. See our OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors, best Functional Testing Tools vendors, and best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression 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.
