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

OpenText Functional Testing vs Qualitia Automation Studio 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (6th)
Qualitia Automation Studio
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
33rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 9.2%, down from 10.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualitia Automation Studio is 0.2%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Test Automation Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Badari Mallireddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation becomes feasible with diverse application support and faster development
I have used UFT for web application automation, desktop application automation, and Oracle ERP automation UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use. It requires less coding, has built-in features for API testing, and most importantly, it supports more than just web…
SY
Testing automation solution that is scriptless and is competitively priced compared to other solutions
The best feature of this solution is the fact that it offers scriptless automation. You don't need to know how to code or program to use it. Within four weeks, my team was up and running. This was the shortest possible ramp-up that we completed in my entire career The integrations for this…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests."
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."
"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."
"The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"The best feature of this solution is the fact that it offers scriptless automation. You don't need to know how to code or program to use it."
 

Cons

"You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out."
"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
"We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing."
"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."
"Customer service is a big drawback. From my personal experience, after creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody."
"UFT has a recording feature. They could make the recording feature window bigger for whatever activities that I am recording. It would improve the user experience if they could create a separate floating panel (or have it automatically show on the side) once the recording starts."
"The integrations for this solutions could be improved, specifically for Slack."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"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."
"Pricing is on a higher end but the competition was even more expensive. With this considered, it is a competitive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
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 do you like most about Micro Focus UFT One?
My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
Areas of OpenText Functional Testing that have room for improvement include having an option to store objects in the public repository when using Object Spy and adding objects, as it currently stor...
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
Springer, PTC, ZS, Shaadi.com, JDA, Cbazaar
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing vs. Qualitia Automation Studio and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.