OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs TestingWhiz comparison

OpenText and Cygnet.One are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #12 with an average rating of 7.8, while Cygnet.One is ranked #23 with an average rating of 7.0. OpenText holds a 2.8% mindshare in FT, compared to Cygnet.One’s 0.2% mindshare. Additionally, 78% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Cygnet.One users who would recommend it.

OpenText Functional Testing...

Read 39 OpenText Functional Testing for Developers reviews

1,852 Views
1,611 Comparison Views

78% willing to recommend

TestingWhiz

Read 1 TestingWhiz review

203 Views
166 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing...

TestingWhiz

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers and TestingWhiz compete in automated testing. OpenText seems advantageous for enterprise integration, while TestingWhiz stands out for usability and quicker deployment.

Features: OpenText Functional Testing provides robust enterprise system integration, comprehensive test management, and automation for complex setups. TestingWhiz enables code-free testing, advanced debugging, and a variety of built-in commands suitable for users with limited coding skills.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText offers efficient deployment with extensive support tailored for intricate environments, though it might need additional setup time. TestingWhiz is designed for quick deployment with responsive support, appealing to businesses prioritizing simple and speedy setups.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText involves higher initial costs due to enterprise-grade capabilities, impacting immediate ROI while favoring extensive environments for long-term benefits. TestingWhiz offers a cost-effective start, yielding faster ROI for small to medium businesses due to lower setup costs and rapid deployment.

To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 864,574 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...

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

12th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Automation Tools (11th)

TestingWhiz

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

23rd

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 2.8%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TestingWhiz is 0.2%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Eitan Gold

SQA Manager at Elmo Motion Control Ltd.

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.

Read full review

Vijay-Sawale

Test Associate & Manager at Opus Technologies

Low code features and good customization but needs more customer-requested features

We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation The organization was able to provide customers with business solutions by giving demos of various tools, assisting in securing…

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 cost is the most important factor in this tool."

"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."

"The most valuable feature for me is the number of protocols that can be tested. It not only tests Web, but also SAP, Siebel, .Net, and even pdf."

"The most valuable features are the object repository."

"I like the tool because we can still access the devices' distance. It's not important where you're working. For example, I can use it in Brazil, Chile, and other parts where people are working. After the pandemic, many companies use it for homework. I think using it to administer and manage the devices is very good and effective."

"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."

"OpenText UFT Developer works well with record technology, making it valuable for recording."

"The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers pros

"TestingWhiz is a low code, no code tool with integration facilities, such as with Jira, and can be used over the cloud."

Cons

"The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement."

"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."

"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."

"Stability depends on the company's infrastructure and end-to-end infrastructure. When I used the tool in my project, we had a big problem with many users using it simultaneously."

"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."

"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise."

"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."

"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers cons

"Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."

"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."

"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."

"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."

"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 pricing is quite high compared to the competition."

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers pricing and cost advice

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

20%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TestingWhiz?

It is cheaper compared to other tools. The tool is web-based with various licenses, including professional and enterprise editions.

See all answers

What needs improvement with TestingWhiz?

Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available. Additionally, there is a need to improve the handling of less critical issues which...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for TestingWhiz?

We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation.

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 47% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 13% of the time

IBM DevOps Test UI vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 4% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 4% of the time

Wikidi Testomato vs OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing for Developers Competitors

No data available

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers

July 2025

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers report

Download OpenText Functional Testing for Developers product report

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

July 2025

Download TestingWhiz product report

Also Known As

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

No data available

Overview

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers offers robust automation capabilities with support for complex algorithms, multi-platform testing, and developer-friendly integration using C# and Java, facilitating seamless testing transitions and efficient automation workflows.

This testing tool is highly valued for its integration with ALM and Jenkins, along with its developer-focused environment adaptable to Eclipse and Visual Studio. With AI-based object recognition, an object repository, and test framework integration, it bolsters DevOps practices while reducing IT workloads. Supporting UFT to LeanFT transition, it caters to SAP, Java, .NET environments, and more. Enhanced with stable automation, extensive protocol support, and both on-premises and cloud deployments, it targets performance, regression, and functional testing, while recording and screengrabs enhance automation capabilities. Future improvements could include expanded browser compatibility, enhanced JavaScript and mobile support, and better object recognition.

What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers?

Complex Algorithm Handling: Manages complex scenarios with ease, including fuzzy logic.
Developer-friendly: Enables coding in C# and Java, integrating seamlessly with popular IDEs.
AI-based Object Recognition: Enhances test automation through advanced object identification.
Extensive Protocol Support: Supports a wide range of protocols for diverse testing requirements.
Seamless Integration: Connects effortlessly with ALM and Jenkins, promoting continuous development.

What benefits can users expect when evaluating OpenText Functional Testing?

Efficient Test Automation: Streamlines test processes, optimizing resource allocation and reducing effort.
Multi-platform Flexibility: Facilitates cross-platform testing, accommodating desktop, web, and banking applications.
Reduced IT Workload: Simplifies automation tasks, decreasing the strain on IT resources.
Enhanced DevOps Support: Integrates well with DevOps practices for continuous testing advancements.

Organizations implement OpenText Functional Testing for complex test automation on desktop, web, and banking applications, supporting performance, regression, and functionality testing across environments like SAP, Java, and .NET. UFT aids in GUI, infrastructure, and ERP application automation, with deployment options including on-premises and cloud implementations. Enhanced screengrabs and recording features aid in practical test case development, while addressing emerging technology needs is a focus.

OpenText

TestingWhiz is a Codeless Automation Testing Tool for Software, Web, Mobile, Database, Cloud, Web Services and API testing. It is pillared on a strong architecture combined with intuitive Automation Engine and short learning curve that promises to take your test automation to the next level.

Cygnet.One

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines

Verizon, IBM, Symantec, VMware, Hyundai, Choice Hotels, Intel, Autodesk, Frost

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

July 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

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.