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

OpenText Functional Testing vs TestingWhiz 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 Regression Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (3rd), Test Automation Tools (4th)
TestingWhiz
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
24th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
12th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 8.1%, down from 8.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TestingWhiz is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing8.1%
TestingWhiz0.9%
Other91.0%
Functional 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.
VS
Test Associate & Manager at Opus Technologies
Low code features and good customization but needs more customer-requested features
We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation The organization was able to provide customers with business solutions by giving demos of various tools, assisting in securing…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is easy to integrate with other platforms."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"The stop automation is a great feature that is not generally supported by other solutions."
"Our current project features more than a 1000 manual test cases, which took several days and resources to execute, and now the suite executes in six hours and less than two when run on multiple machines."
"This tool is awesome for automation even though it is expensive."
"For test automation, it helps to speed up the testing and to speed up the software delivery, especially for HPE UFT because you have lots of test automation tools."
"OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier."
"For the QTP/UFT projects I have worked on ROI is always over 300% in the long term."
"TestingWhiz is a low code, no code tool with integration facilities, such as with Jira, and can be used over the cloud."
 

Cons

"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."
"Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"There could be improvements in report export features similar to SmartBear."
"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"UFT still requires some coding."
"We have to download it, then install it on our own machines and the machines sometimes aren't stable; since we have PDIs, also the UFT isn't stable and I don't know yet where the connection is."
"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."
"Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."
"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."
"The price is reasonable."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"It's an expensive solution."
"The price is one aspect that could be improved."
"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional 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%
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TestingWhiz?
It is cheaper compared to other tools. The tool is web-based with various licenses, including professional and enterprise editions.
What needs improvement with TestingWhiz?
Some features need to be implemented based on customer customization requests, which are currently not available. Additionally, there is a need to improve the handling of less critical issues which...
What is your primary use case for TestingWhiz?
We utilized the solution to showcase our capabilities to customers or clients, and demonstrate how it can save money and achieve a return on investment through automation.
 

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
Verizon, IBM, Symantec, VMware, Hyundai, Choice Hotels, Intel, Autodesk, Frost
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, OpenText and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: August 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.