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

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs Zeenyx AscentialTest 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
5.9
OpenText Functional Testing reduces test automation time and costs, increasing ROI by 70-80% compared to manual testing.
Sentiment score
7.3
Zeenyx AscentialTest boosts productivity, reduces costs, and improves project outcomes through intuitive design, automated testing, and enhanced test coverage.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
5.6
OpenText Functional Testing support is generally effective but inconsistent, with improvements noted and suggestions for enhancing responsiveness.
Sentiment score
9.2
Zeenyx AscentialTest customer service is praised for its prompt, knowledgeable support, efficiently resolving issues and ensuring smooth user experiences.
Initially, it was quite poor, but it seems they are making efforts to improve.
For technical support, I would give them an eight because whenever we have a concern, they immediately reach out to us.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
OpenText Functional Testing offers scalability, supports diverse ecosystems, and enhances integration, though resource consumption is a noted limitation.
Sentiment score
8.0
Zeenyx AscentialTest excels in handling large-scale testing efficiently, supporting numerous users and test cases without performance issues.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
Experiences with OpenText Testing vary; some face stability issues, but recent improvements enhance reliability compared to competitors.
Sentiment score
8.0
Zeenyx AscentialTest is praised for its stability, reliability, and bug resistance, making it ideal for diverse testing needs.
We regularly update the product, and overall, it is stable.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Functional Testing requires enhanced integration, stability, performance, and accessibility for broader technology, mobile support, and modernized interfaces.
Users find Zeenyx AscentialTest's reporting, integration, stability, and documentation inadequate, with a steep learning curve for new users.
In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary.
 

Setup Cost

Enterprise users find OpenText Functional Testing costly, preferring open-source alternatives, with high setup and licensing fees.
<p>Zeenyx AscentialTest offers cost-effective, scalable pricing with annual and perpetual licenses, suitable for both small teams and large organizations.</p>
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 flexibility, integration, and developer-friendly features, enhancing productivity and efficiency with strong stability and automation.
Zeenyx AscentialTest is praised for its ease of use, powerful automation, flexibility, detailed reporting, and reliable performance.
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
6.4
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (11th)
Zeenyx AscentialTest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
18th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (13th)
 

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 Zeenyx AscentialTest is 0.3%, up from 0.3% 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 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.
Tobias Roth - PeerSpot reviewer
Robust automation with reusable steps and seamless integration
The concept of reusable steps in Zeenyx AscentialTest has significantly enhanced our test automation efficiency. Encapsulating common actions into modular steps reduces redundancy in test scripts and ensures consistency across scenarios. This approach streamlines maintenance efforts, allowing updates to be applied universally, making our test suite more agile and adaptable to evolving project requirements. The concept of reusable steps is a key factor in maximizing reusability and maintainability in our test automation strategy. AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows. This capability ensures precise interaction with various components of an application's interface, further enhancing the reliability and effectiveness of our automated tests.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Educational Organization
5%
Healthcare Company
21%
Government
15%
University
11%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
 

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?
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 do you like most about Zeenyx AscentialTest?
AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows.
What needs improvement with Zeenyx AscentialTest?
While Zeenyx AscentialTest has proven to be a valuable asset in our testing processes, there are areas where improvements could enhance the overall user experience. One notable aspect is the user i...
What is your primary use case for Zeenyx AscentialTest?
We use AscentialTest for automated testing of Powerbuilder applications via CI/CD pipeline with GitLab. We have fully integrated all tests in our CI/CD pipeline. Thanks to the integration, much wor...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
TJX Companies, Nuance Communications, Ericsson Inc., Transatlantic Reinsurance Company, Accenture, Nutrition Coordinating Center, Univ. of MN, iConectiv, Fortress Software, and LMP Corp.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. Zeenyx AscentialTest and other solutions. Updated: August 2025.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.