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

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs ReadyAPI Test comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 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
7.2
OpenText Functional Testing cuts automation costs by 50%, enhances ROI, and saves 70-80% through increased shared usage.
Sentiment score
7.9
ReadyAPI Test greatly boosts developer and QA productivity, automating 10,000 tests hourly, providing substantial ROI despite high costs.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
5.7
Reports are mixed, with some praising responsiveness and others criticizing slow responses and difficulties reaching higher-level support.
Sentiment score
7.3
ReadyAPI Test is user-friendly with responsive SmartBear support, though some users suggest improvement; online communities offer additional help.
Initially, it was quite poor, but it seems they are making efforts to improve.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.8
OpenText Functional Testing is scalable and flexible, supporting multiple languages and platforms, with some concerns about licensing costs.
Sentiment score
7.7
ReadyAPI Test is scalable, suitable for various teams, customizable with scripting, and generally satisfies users despite some integration issues.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.8
OpenText Functional Testing has mixed stability reviews, with issues in integration and performance, yet shows improvement over time.
Sentiment score
7.1
ReadyAPI Test is stable and reliable with minor startup delays, improved from earlier versions, and highly praised for consistency.
We regularly update the product, and overall, it is stable.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Functional Testing needs IoT support, better stability, multi-platform compatibility, enhanced usability, and improved pricing and technology integration.
ReadyAPI Test needs better integration, support, documentation, performance, customization, and training, along with extended trials and improved stability.
In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary.
 

Setup Cost

Enterprise users find OpenText Functional Testing expensive despite integration benefits, with high standard licensing fees and setup costs.
ReadyAPI Test's high pricing and licensing issues lead users to suggest bundling and discounts for better affordability and clarity.
The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText Functional Testing offers versatile, user-friendly multi-platform automation with ALM integration, supporting C#, Java, APIs, and DevOps practices.
ReadyAPI Test is user-friendly, integrates well, supports database validations, and enables easy API, security, and UI testing with groovy scripting.
OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
12th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (11th)
ReadyAPI Test
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
21st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (9th), API Testing Tools (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 2.6%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 0.5%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Eitan Gold - PeerSpot reviewer
User-friendly integration with support for Visual Studio enhances GUI testing capabilities
OpenText UFT Developer ( /products/opentext-uft-developer-reviews ) 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 ( /products/framework-reviews ), and they work well together.
Luis Sanchez - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps in data, regression, performance, security, and functional testing
ReadyAPI Test needs to improve its reporting. While reports provide essential information when issues arise, or tests fail, having more graphical representations directly within the reports would be beneficial. It needs to improve stability and scalability as well. The tool's support is slow, and takes months to reach a solution.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Insurance Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Developer?
There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership.
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?
In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary. This limits the technology's ability to recognize every object.
What do you like most about SoapUI Pro?
The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SoapUI Pro?
ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten.
What needs improvement with SoapUI Pro?
ReadyAPI Test needs to improve its reporting. While reports provide essential information when issues arise, or tests fail, having more graphical representations directly within the reports would b...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
SoapUI NG Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Apple, Cisco, FedEx, eBay, Microsoft, MasterCard, Pfizer, Nike, Oracle, Volvo, Lufthansa, Disney, HP, Intel, U.S. Air Force, Schindler
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. ReadyAPI Test and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.