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

OpenText Functional Testing vs SoapUI 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 API Testing Tools
6th
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), Test Automation Tools (3rd)
SoapUI
Ranking in API Testing Tools
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the API Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 11.7%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SoapUI is 0.5%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API 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…
Mahendra Andhale - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for API testing and provides Groovy plugin
We use the solution mainly for API testing The solution's most valuable features are the designing of API, Property Transfer feature, and Groovy plugin. The solution should include some plug-ins to share the generated reports over email. Sometimes, Groovy can be a tricky language, and we need to…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."
"OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier."
"The solution is easy to integrate with other platforms."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."
"Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."
"The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner."
"The solution's most valuable features are the designing of API, Property Transfer feature, and Groovy plugin."
"SoapUI is a pretty simple tool."
"We need to test the APIs as we build them. I use the product for API testing. You can do AWS security in SoapUI. With SoapUI, we can even perform mutual SSL authentication by incorporating certificates into the SoapUI browser. This allows us to send transactions to the backend downstream."
 

Cons

"The scripting language could be improved. They're currently using Visual Basic, but I think that people need something more advanced, like Python or Java."
"I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps."
"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."
"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."
"There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT."
"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."
"The solution is expensive."
"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function."
"The solution should include some plug-ins to share the generated reports over email."
"The product needs to be available as an extension for the Chrome browser."
"There are more advanced API testing tools than SoapUI, and SoapUI could be made better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."
"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."
"The tool's price is high."
"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."
"HPE recently extended the demo license period from 30 days to 60 days which was a very wise and popular decision to give potential customers more time to install it and try it for free. Even if your company has a salesperson come in and demo UFT, I would highly encourage at least one of your developers or automation engineers to download and install it to explore for themselves the functionality and features included during the demo trial period."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"The price is one aspect that could be improved."
"The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""
"SoapUI is an open-source solution."
"SoapUI is a cheap tool that does not have an expensive license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 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...
What do you like most about SoapUI?
We need to test the APIs as we build them. I use the product for API testing. You can do AWS security in SoapUI. With SoapUI, we can even perform mutual SSL authentication by incorporating certific...
What needs improvement with SoapUI?
The solution should include some plug-ins to share the generated reports over email. Sometimes, Groovy can be a tricky language, and we need to focus more on that.
What is your primary use case for SoapUI?
We use the solution mainly for API testing.
 

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
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing vs. SoapUI and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.