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

OpenText Functional Testing vs pCloudy comparison

 

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 Mobile App Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (3rd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (3rd), Test Automation Tools (4th)
pCloudy
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
14th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Mobile App Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 19.5%, down from 21.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of pCloudy is 2.0%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile App Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing19.5%
pCloudy2.0%
Other78.5%
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.
RM
Business Consultant at Tech Mahindra Limited
Helps applications to be compatible with other devices
The tool has connectivity issues. I had raised the issue with the support team who had asked me to check my internet connection and refresh the browser. I want that communication to be present at a UI level. I want a pop-up that asks users to refresh the page or check their internet connection. The product's reports also need to be optimized and refined to be presented in a better way. The tool needs to add a search option that will help users filter and extract the information that they need.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The best features of OpenText Functional Testing include descriptive programming, the ability to add objects in the repository, and its ease of use for UI compared to other tools."
"UFT is the only technology that enabled us to actually automate our core application."
"​Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"The most valuable features are the API testing, the integration with DevOps and accessibility to people without a lot of technical skill."
"I support UFT as the best solution due to the skill set needed to operate the tool."
"The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests."
"The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."
"For us, object recording is the most valuable and most used feature."
"The product is user-friendly. We can see the logs when we find the bugs."
"The product is also very good on the UI level where they can see the logs and discover any problem at the app level, so that the development team can fix that."
"The product is very good on the UI level."
 

Cons

"I would like to see them remove the shortcoming of working with .NET applications, as there is not much support provided for automating applications developed on .NET."
"We would like to see smart identification (captures a unique object during testing) work more reliably."
"Because of SAP, I would rate the stability a five out of ten."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."
"I would like to see more integration with LeanFT and use UFT for continuous integration. It's still a closed product."
"The initial setup is complex."
"Previously, the product was a script-based solution. Presently, the tool offers non-script, no-code, or low-code functionalities, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The connectivity is always a challenge for us."
"The connectivity is always a challenge. We have to maintain a certain bandwidth at our end to connect the tool and that can be a problem."
"The tool has connectivity issues. I had raised the issue with the support team who had asked me to check my internet connection and refresh the browser. I want that communication to be present at a UI level. I want a pop-up that asks users to refresh the page or check their internet connection. The product's reports also need to be optimized and refined to be presented in a better way. The tool needs to add a search option that will help users filter and extract the information that they need."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."
"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."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"The price is one aspect that could be improved."
"The price is only $3,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company. Probably no more than five or 10. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't see that being an issue."
"The price is reasonable."
"I would rate the tool's pricing a six-point five out of ten. It is neither too low nor high. The product has different packages like gold, silver, and platinum. The number of users is determined on the basis of the package. My company has subscribed for the product's annual plan."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
7%
Computer Software Company
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise74
No data available
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Philips, Capgemini, Honeywell, Jio, Northwell Health, Swiggy
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing vs. pCloudy and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.