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

OpenText Functional Testing vs Sauce Labs comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 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
6.8
OpenText Functional Testing boosts ROI by enhancing efficiency with AI, reducing manual efforts, and accelerating test execution time.
Sentiment score
8.0
Sauce Labs boosts ROI by optimizing release cycles, reducing costs, enhancing test efficiency, and enabling broader device testing.
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.1
OpenText Functional Testing's customer service is praised for responsiveness, but support experiences vary in wait times and issue resolution.
Sentiment score
8.0
Sauce Labs' customer service is praised for responsiveness, friendliness, and efficiency, with most users highly satisfied despite occasional delays.
Organizations can't wait for this lengthy process, especially when they are under pressure with their timelines.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
I would rate the support for this product a seven on a scale of one to ten.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
OpenText Functional Testing is scalable with proper license management and infrastructure, excelling in test automation scalability and integration.
Sentiment score
6.9
Sauce Labs is scalable but faces challenges with cost, VM limitations, outages, and requires more data centers for extensive scaling.
Running them in parallel allows you to consume multiple runtime licenses and just execute the tests that don't have conflicting priorities and get through a lot of volume much quicker.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
OpenText Functional Testing performs well on suitable hardware, but stability varies with new features and requires strategic implementation.
Sentiment score
6.8
Sauce Labs offers stable, reliable cloud testing with occasional issues, but improvements and timely support enhance user satisfaction.
One of the key stability issues was that Windows would consume memory without releasing it, leading to regression testing crashes.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Functional Testing is criticized for high memory usage, slow performance, poor compatibility, and requires technical skills and costly investment.
Users want clearer documentation, faster processing, better reports, improved integrations, more device coverage, accurate logging, and responsive support.
We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.
 

Setup Cost

Despite its high cost and complex pricing, OpenText Functional Testing is valued for support and features, offering flexible licenses.
Enterprise users find Sauce Labs pricing flexible but costly, recommending starting small and scaling to manage costs effectively.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText Functional Testing enhances automation efficiency with AI tools, platform compatibility, and support for diverse technologies.
Sauce Labs offers cross-browser compatibility, video recording, and parallel test execution for scalable testing across multiple platforms and devices.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
The ease of being able to create scripts using the AI tools are the differentiating factors.
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (6th)
Sauce Labs
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
13th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
18th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 8.4%, down from 9.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sauce Labs is 5.4%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing8.4%
Sauce Labs5.4%
Other86.2%
Functional Testing 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…
AnupKumar4 - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers good stability and robust but lacks generative AI capabilities
Technical support is equally very important. If you talk about anything deployed to production, and the project is live, customers are using that, and they might face some issues, some functional issues. That's when support people play a role in identifying the fix or the incident. Based on that, we create an incident based on the customer defect or whatever. Once the incident gets raised, the support will play a role in working on that particular incident. If it's a code-based incident, administration, or integration issue, support people play a big role in resolving those issues before reaching the exact developers.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise71
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise26
Large Enterprise73
 

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...
What do you like most about Sauce Labs?
It has significantly enhanced our testing accuracy by approximately 50%.
What needs improvement with Sauce Labs?
Sauce Labs can include new technologies like generative AI, which can reduce the human effort in writing test cases. For example, in my current project, we reduced the time it took to complete user...
What is your primary use case for Sauce Labs?
I work as an automation engineer using Selenium WebDriver with Java, and API automation using Rest Assured with Java. I have also worked with Docker integration on AWS. Additionally, I have experie...
 

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
Salesforce.com, Mozilla, Zendesk, Puppet Labs, Twitter, Bank of America, Eventbrite, Bleacher Report, Okta, Intuit, Travelocity, Sharecare, CapitalOne.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing vs. Sauce Labs and other solutions. Updated: October 2025.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.