OpenText Functional Testing and Zeenyx AscentialTest compete in the functional testing software market. Zeenyx AscentialTest seems more robust due to its feature set, while OpenText might appeal with pricing and support.
Features: OpenText Functional Testing provides strong integration with enterprise environments and robust test management. It supports various technologies and offers excellent compatibility with Oracle, PeopleSoft, SAP, and more, alongside powerful automation features for desktop and web applications. Zeenyx AscentialTest is noted for ease of use, scriptless automation, and versatile testing capabilities for both desktop and web apps, making it suitable for comprehensive automation.
Room for Improvement: OpenText Functional Testing could enhance its user interface and reduce complexity in setting up tests. It might also improve test script maintenance and reporting accuracy. Zeenyx AscentialTest can expand support for more third-party integrations and enhance compatibility with newer technologies. It could also benefit from refining its AI capabilities and expanding its community support.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Functional Testing offers straightforward deployment within enterprise IT ecosystems with responsive customer support, making it ideal for traditional setups. Zeenyx AscentialTest provides a flexible deployment model ensuring a faster setup, backed by effective customer service, catering to organizations seeking rapid implementation.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing typically involves a higher initial cost but offers extensive enterprise features that promise significant ROI over time, appealing to larger firms. Zeenyx AscentialTest presents a more budget-friendly setup with lower upfront costs, offering high ROI through efficient resource use, attracting businesses focused on budget constraints.
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.
Organizations can't wait for this lengthy process, especially when they are under pressure with their timelines.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
I would rate the support for this product a seven on a scale of one to ten.
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.
One of the key stability issues was that Windows would consume memory without releasing it, leading to regression testing crashes.
We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing.
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.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
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.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
The ease of being able to create scripts using the AI tools are the differentiating factors.
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| OpenText Functional Testing | 6.3% |
| Zeenyx AscentialTest | 1.7% |
| Other | 92.0% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 20 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 13 |
| Large Enterprise | 71 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 7 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 3 |
| Large Enterprise | 4 |
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?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.
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.
