OpenText Functional Testing vs TestProject [EOL] comparison

OpenText and Tricentis are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. Additionally, 87% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 71% of Tricentis users who would recommend it.

OpenText Functional Testing

Read 98 OpenText Functional Testing reviews

8,018 Views
6,334 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

TestProject [EOL]

Read 6 TestProject [EOL] reviews

71% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing

TestProject [EOL]

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

OpenText Functional Testing and TestProject [EOL] compete in the software testing category, with OpenText having an upper hand due to its comprehensive functionality and support across multiple platforms.

Features: OpenText Functional Testing offers GUI, database, and API testing capabilities, robust automation frameworks, and extensive product compatibility. TestProject [EOL] provides simple record-and-play functionality, ease of use for web and mobile testing, and a scriptless approach appealing to users with limited coding knowledge.

Room for Improvement: OpenText Functional Testing users highlight its high memory consumption, slow execution speed, and the complex price model. TestProject [EOL] needs better integration support, clearer reporting, and faced challenges with the transition from free to commercial offerings.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Functional Testing offers on-premises and private cloud deployment with varying customer service experiences, while TestProject [EOL] is appreciated for its quick deployment and helpful customer service, often not requiring assistance.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing requires significant investment with expensive licenses but offers justified ROI through enhanced productivity. TestProject [EOL] initially offered free usage, which later included licensing costs, providing ROI through its ease of use and open-source framework.

To learn more, read our detailed Test Automation Tools Report (Updated: October 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Test Automation Tools

October 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 872,706 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 Functional Testing

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

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

TestProject [EOL]

Average Rating

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Featured Reviews

Badari Mallireddy

QA Automation Architect at Emerson

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…

Read full review

Ashu Singh

Senior quality analyst at Lalli

An easy-to-use tool that saves time and functions within a limited budget

The solution's reporting system should be clearer and easier to understand for a layperson. I and some other experts may be able to understand the solution's reporting system, but a layperson won't understand it. For a layperson, the solution should be easy to use. Price-wise, TestProject is an expensive product. The product's current price should be lowered to attract potential customers.

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

"The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests."

"Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."

"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."

"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."

"Has improved our organization by allowing us to obtain fast, detailed information about the behavior of our products and to supply this to the customer, enabling us to work together without the need for special programming knowledge."

"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."

"The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."

"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."

More OpenText Functional Testing pros

"The script-less part of it was good for novice users."

"The ease of web and mobile functional testing is pretty easy on TestProject."

"Since implementing this solution, our code management has been reduced by 40% to 60%."

"Ability to carry out automatic testing without having coding knowledge."

"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."

"The automation and AI are very good."

Cons

"We'd like it to have less scripting."

"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."

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

"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."

"UFT still requires some coding."

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

"The speed could be improved because a large test suite takes some time to execute."

"The solution is expensive."

More OpenText Functional Testing cons

"The support is a weak point since they discontinued the tool."

"I and some other experts may be able to understand the solution's reporting system, but a layperson won't understand it."

"We'd like to see a direct cloud from TestProject instead of some other third party."

"TestProject needs better support for integration with other products to provide a better overall solution for test planning and test data management."

"In an upcoming release, there should be a SaaS offering available."

"Difficult trying to configure on more than one browser."

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"The tool's price is high."

"The price is reasonable."

"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."

"The price is only $3,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company. Probably no more than five or 10. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't see that being an issue."

"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."

"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 pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."

More OpenText Functional Testing pricing and cost advice

"The solution is free."

"Price-wise, TestProject is an expensive product...With TestProject, there is a need to pay a certain amount towards its licensing costs."

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

872,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	1

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?

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 23% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 11% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 8% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 7% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 5% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing Competitors

No data available

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing

October 2025

Download OpenText Functional Testing product report

Buyer's Guide

TestProject [EOL]

October 2025

Download TestProject [EOL] product report

Also Known As

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

No data available

Overview

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

TestProject is a free end-to-end test automation platform for web, mobile, and API testing that’s supported by the #1 test automation community.

Tricentis

Sample Customers

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

IBM, Wix, Flir, Payoneer

Buyer's Guide

Test Automation Tools

October 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, UiPath, OpenText and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: October 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

872,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Automation 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.