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

OpenText Functional Testing vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 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
3rd
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (3rd), Test Automation Tools (4th)
OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
18th
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Mobile App Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 20.7%, up from 20.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web is 6.0%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile App Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing20.7%
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web6.0%
Other73.3%
Mobile App Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Has supported faster test execution and increased flexibility while offering room to improve support responsiveness
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates another day of delay to get to the level that's needed. This is a common practice across most companies where you call, you get the entry-level person, and then they work their way up to help screen calls so that they are more focused.
Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Has reduced the need for scripting knowledge and enabled broader test script creation
The ease of use and zero cost are what I appreciate most about this product. The key for us is their Digital Lab service. With Digital Lab service, you have no control over those devices; you are simply getting an iOS device and using it as it is. Many of our customers are using InTune and other deployment services that have security settings on them. OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web allows us to test with our customers' setup of their device and ensure that the scripts will run against it versus a cloud service that does not have any of their security sizing and cannot truly mimic a real-life scenario. The overall framework of UFT in general helps reduce manual testing efforts for us. The ease of use and being able to enroll more people into developing test scripts using their AI function, which they call AI but is OCR recognition, is significant. By being able to develop scripts that way, you prevent having to know VB script. I have testers who create manual scripts and are already running the test manually; now they can perform that same effort in UFT One, and it creates the scripts so they do not have to recreate them every time. We do use the product's API integrations at some customers, though I am not as familiar with it as some of my colleagues are. My understanding is that for free, you can set up virtual APIs that do not exist yet, allowing you to mimic that behavior even before your APIs have been built. That is a huge selling feature and a significant zero-cost feature in being able to run your API tests even before the API is finished.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"A key benefit, obviously, is in terms of effort savings that we have achieved using UFT."
"The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."
"The Object Spy in UFT is very valuable for spying on controls in our mobile application and viewing their properties and values."
"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."
"UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use."
"It's simple to set up."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"This is a solution that's easy to use and it also gives us the possibility to use real devices connected either on the Mobile Center server or on our own computers and it works with both iOS and Android devices."
"We escalate tickets to HPE, and we don't have problems."
"Using the existing enterprise tools, like UFT, or even if you want to go open source, you can use them and it's a real user-functional performance, we are able to achieve that."
"The ease of use and being able to enroll more people into developing test scripts using their AI function, which they call AI but is OCR recognition, is significant."
"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"The main benefit is that you can get a very quick idea regarding the performance of your application, and it also helps you discover hidden pain points that you would not have found without using this tool."
"The pricing is great."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
 

Cons

"They should include AI-based testing features."
"Cost is the biggest issue with UFT. It is not cheap."
"I don't like this tool and I don't think that it's a successful example for automation."
"I would like a version that works quicker. Also, a lot of people can't afford it because it's expensive."
"It looks like User Acceptance Testing of the product is getting bypassed entirely because this design has precedence in UFT."
"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"I think the interface is not very good and I have used other solutions that are easier to learn."
"Sometimes, it's challenging to have relations with OpenText support."
"With versions prior to 2.0 I found that configuration was trickier than it should be, particularly with aspects such as NV."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"It's complex, and you need more skills than in most implementations."
"Digital Lab is a pretty solid product with areas that could be continuously improved on."
"Deployment was an issue. Each time we set it up and deployed, it failed and we had to relaunch it again."
"Because of connection errors, we've haven't yet been able to set it up properly at my company."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"The price is one aspect that could be improved."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."
"The tool's price is high."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."
"The product could be more affordable."
"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."
"While the pricing may seem relatively high, when compared to competitors, it often falls in line or can even be more cost-effective."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Non Profit
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise74
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT One?
I'm more familiar with Functional Testing. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is a different product set that functions as an IDE for writing custom code. We don't leverage that product bec...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
Digital Lab is a pretty solid product with areas that could be continuously improved on.
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
I deal with OpenText Analysis Database and Core Performance Engineering, which are categories of software rather than individual pieces. We focus on the ADM area, which includes ALM, UFT One, UFT D...
What advice do you have for others considering Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
I do have experience with OpenText products and OpenText ALM. I have been using ALM Quality Center, which has had a few names for it over time, but it is the old Quality Center that was then rename...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing vs. OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.