No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs Oracle Application Testing Suite comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
8th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (9th)
Oracle Application Testing ...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
27th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (14th), Load Testing Tools (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 3.7%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.5%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers3.7%
Oracle Application Testing Suite1.5%
Other94.8%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Eitan Gold - PeerSpot reviewer
SQA Manager at Elmo Motion Control Ltd.
User-friendly integration with support for Visual Studio enhances GUI testing capabilities
OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio. The support is excellent. It is easy to implement tests with OpenText UFT Developer. We primarily use it for GUI testing and testing web applications with another application. This is the main usage for us. We also integrate it with the N-unit Framework, and they work well together.
Rishabh-Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"In UFT, it's a simple click to insert the checkpoints."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio."
"If a company doesn't have people who are skilled in programming, they definitely should go with UFT, as it's simple to use and doesn't require programming knowledge."
"When they've been working with it for a while and they see the complexity when you're doing real and tough test situations, then they see that this kind of tool is very, very good."
"The most important thing about LeanFT is that it gives us the opportunity to introduce developer testing."
"In our case, because we’re in the insurance industry, we have technologies from 20 years old to brand new, and that’s one reason that LeanFT is so great -- because it can support all those technologies, even the older ones."
"Integrates well with other products."
"It's user friendly and in-built API support makes it very easy to automate or develop an automation framework."
"The solution is scalable."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"My advice to others is if they are using any Oracle Cloud Fusion-based or on-premise-based application, this is a good solution to use."
"It has allowed more thorough testing with performance-based testing, in addition to regression testing and regular testing with each software release."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."
"Overall, Oracle Application Testing Suite is very easy to use and you can create a good framework for developing and testing."
"Helps us to reduce the workload to check the system."
 

Cons

"The solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites."
"Since it was a slightly different way of doing things, it was a little complex."
"Number one thing is we are an Oracle shop, so we do Oracle ERP testing, and that add-in from UFT, that technology is not in LeanFT right now."
"I would rate technical support a one out of five."
"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster."
"Ultimately, due to the scripting, integration, and other functionality that is missing, we may switch to another solution in the future."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"In future releases, I'd like to see disruptors such as IOT and test drones."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."
"Transaction handling was very simple and I’d say quite primitive."
"I think that licensing policies could be more intuitive; when we installed this application for the first time, we couldn't understand why there were only two users."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
"OATS has some promising features that frankly we wish we could utilize, but so far we haven’t had much luck doing so."
"WebForms works fine, but scripting in the EBS forms option isn't very consistent and stable."
"Room for improvement would be for the reporting features. If they could improve the dashboards, that would be helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."
"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
"When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
"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 price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."
"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."
"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Healthcare Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise30
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?
As of now, we don't have integration in the CI/CD pipeline, but they are supporting that as well. When your machine is in a locked state, you can even execute the Windows application automation. Mi...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
For functional testing, we are using OpenText Functional Testing for Developers as our product for testing. I am using the cross-browser testing capabilities of OpenText Functional Testing for Deve...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
OATS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.