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

OpenText Functional Testing vs UiPath Test Cloud 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.5
OpenText Functional Testing boosts ROI by enhancing productivity with AI automation, supporting systems, and achieving high returns quickly.
Sentiment score
8.1
UiPath Test Cloud enhances automation efficiency, reduces costs, speeds implementation, and offers high ROI despite initial expenses.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText Functional Testing support is mixed, with some users satisfied and others citing slow responses and unhelpfulness, impacting satisfaction.
Sentiment score
8.0
UiPath Test Cloud offers responsive, highly-rated customer support through various channels, ensuring effective issue resolution despite extra costs.
After creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
They get into the meeting, understand the problem, and try to provide a solution quickly.
Support should be free, especially for product-related issues.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText Functional Testing is scalable, adaptable, integrates well, and requires careful cost and license management for large teams.
Sentiment score
7.3
UiPath Test Cloud is scalable, excels in regression testing, praised for low-code features, with challenges in integration and cost.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
Scaling with UiPath Test Cloud is supported; they have the infrastructure to scale automation to meet business needs.
Proper knowledge of Orchestrator and CI/CD processes makes the product truly scalable.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.5
OpenText Functional Testing stability varies; it depends on system configuration, with issues arising from resource limitations and updates.
Sentiment score
7.9
UiPath Test Cloud is stable, highly rated by users, with minor performance issues attributed to external factors, offering effective automation.
One of the key stability issues was that Windows would consume memory without releasing it, leading to regression testing crashes.
It is performing better than two to three years back; significant improvements have been made for complete project delivery.
UiPath Test Suite has matured over the years and is now quite stable.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Functional Testing requires enhancements in performance, usability, integration, language support, pricing, and user interface to improve adoption.
UiPath Test Cloud requires enhancements in mobile automation, integration, usability, pricing, visualization, AI-driven features, and tool compatibility.
If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.
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 they could add defect management, it could work independently without needing Jira.
UiPath should introduce compatibility so existing processes in Selenium or other tools can work seamlessly with UiPath Test automation.
 

Setup Cost

OpenText Functional Testing is costly but valued for robust features and ALM compatibility, needing experienced users for maximum ROI.
UiPath Test Cloud offers premium features with rigid, costly licensing, yet remains cost-effective compared to consumption-based options.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
Our customers usually pay around 30K to 35K for five licenses, which is priced per year.
The pricing of UiPath tends to be on the higher side, which can restrict smaller companies from adopting it.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText Functional Testing provides versatile platform compatibility, automation features, and seamless integration enhancing efficient test automation and maintenance.
UiPath Test Cloud offers seamless integration, streamlines workflows, enhances productivity, and provides cost-efficiency with its intuitive interface and features.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier.
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
The most valuable feature of UiPath Test Cloud that I have found is the TestManager dashboard, which integrates with Jira through Planview Tasktop.
What I really like about UiPath Test Suite is its ability to ensure that any changes made do not affect other functionalities.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in API Testing Tools
7th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
96
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (2nd)
UiPath Test Cloud
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in API Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 9.5%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of UiPath Test Cloud is 5.2%, up from 2.6% 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…
Manigandan Rajavelu - PeerSpot reviewer
Comprehensive, good value for money, and a lot of time savings
I discovered a lot of bugs in UiPath Test Suite. If I publish a test case in Test Manager as well as in Orchestrator, the existing test case does not get replaced. It is appending the test case but not replacing it. We want to replace the existing test case, but this functionality is not available. In Test Manager, there are a lot of defects in the ROI report that we provide to the operations team on a monthly basis. It is not very clear and detailed. There is no detailed explanation of every test case. There is only a high-level overview. We cannot download the report from Test Manager. We have to use some other tool, such as Power BI, to view the data.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
OpenText UFT One required knowledge of VBScript, which is a limited version of Visual Basic. We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory ...
What do you like most about UiPath Test Suite?
Being able to use regular expressions, activities, and attributes is valuable.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for UiPath Test Suite?
I consider it expensive. I would rate it a seven out of ten for pricing. It's priced per license on an annual basis. Our customers usually pay around 30K to 35K for five licenses, which is priced p...
What needs improvement with UiPath Test Suite?
They can improve the dashboard by adding some widgets for reporting. Also, currently, they don't have defect management modules. If they could add defect management, it could work independently wit...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
Test Suite
 

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. UiPath Test Cloud and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.