OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab comparison

OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Download the complete report

Helped 850,028 peers since 2012

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 UFT Developer

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

13th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Automation Tools (13th)

OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

18th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.6%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT Digital Lab is 0.9%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Eitan Gold

SQA Manager at Elmo Motion Control Ltd.

User-friendly integration with support for Visual Studio enhances GUI testing capabilities

OpenText UFT Developer ( /products/opentext-uft-developer-reviews ) is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio. The support is excellent. It is easy to implement tests with OpenText UFT Developer. We primarily use it for GUI testing and testing web applications with another application. This is the main usage for us. We also integrate it with the N-unit Framework ( /products/framework-reviews ), and they work well together.

Read full review

Robinson Caiado

Sales Leader at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Automates mobile solutions while boosting productivity and fostering innovation

It allows multiple devices to be used and gives flexibility in adding devices when a project is needed. Most of the time, I have several devices where it is predefined. We can use it, but sometimes, we must scale it in a particular situation. It's very flexible. It is very important because we can use a different approach to software testing, for example, to find a way to execute UFT software testing with only one execution. This reproduces all the platforms that we need.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks."

"The most valuable feature is stability."

"There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership."

"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."

"This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us."

"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."

"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."

"One of the important features, which speeds up the automation testing development with LeanFT, is its object repository functions. Object identification are the most time-consuming aspect of building automation tests. LeanFT gives that out of the box. It helps you identify the objects and after that, once you got the object in place, then it's just about building the test scripts. So it reduces your development time significantly."

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."

"The product is easy to use."

"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."

"The solution is easy to use. There are features to orchestrate mobile testing, including mobile testing automation. You can test different devices at the same time."

"The fact that it allows users to test on real mobile devices instead of emulators is something that projects have told us is beyond compare."

"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."

Cons

"Stability depends on the company's infrastructure and end-to-end infrastructure. When I used the tool in my project, we had a big problem with many users using it simultaneously."

"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."

"The price of the solution could improve."

"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."

"The tool could be a little easier."

"UFT Developer is good, but it requires high-level development skills. Scripting is something that everybody should know to be able to work with this product. Currently, it is very development intensive, and you need to know various scripting languages. It would be good if the development effort could be cut short, and it can be scriptless like Tosca. It will help in more adoption because not every team has people with a software engineering background. If it is scriptless, the analysts who wear multiple hats and come from different backgrounds can also use it in a friendly manner. It is also quite expensive."

"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."

"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."

More OpenText UFT Developer cons

"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."

"We need to scale devices easily. Some customers would like to loop in AWS or other cloud providers to check if their devices have the cloud factor. OpenText UFT Digital Lab needs to improve it."

"For the most part, the key challenge is ensuring that customers fully utilize the product as intended and adopt the appropriate frameworks to implement the solutions effectively."

"We like to host the tools centrally. We would need them to be multi-tenants, so different projects could log on and have their own set of devices and their own set of apps, and they wouldn't see data from other projects that are using it."

"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."

"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."

"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."

"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."

"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."

"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."

"When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."

"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."

"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."

More OpenText UFT Developer pricing and cost advice

"While the pricing may seem relatively high, when compared to competitors, it often falls in line or can even be more cost-effective."

"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."

"The product could be more affordable."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

19%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Financial Services Firm

22%

Computer Software Company

21%

Non Profit

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Developer?

There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?

It's a high-priced solution compared to Selenium. Selenium is free, though there is a paid version now too. Selenium has improved a lot, and it's still okay to use. It's a functional testing tool, ...

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?

The solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites. It is also suggested that the design and some functionality could be better.

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Mobile?

For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily.

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?

Sometimes, it's challenging to have relations with OpenText support.

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?

We use it in financial services companies to automate mobile solutions and applications.

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Developer

Comparisons

Compared 59% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 20% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

IBM DevOps Test UI vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText UFT Developer Competitors

Sauce Labs vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 22% of the time

Perfecto vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 21% of the time

BrowserStack vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 17% of the time

Appium vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 17% of the time

AWS Device Farm vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 12% of the time

More OpenText UFT Digital Lab Competitors

Product Reports

OpenText UFT Developer

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Download OpenText UFT Digital Lab product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT

Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center

Overview

With OpenText UFT Developer, you get object identification tools, parallel testing, and record/replay capabilities.

OpenText

Our enterprise-level solution is a complete, centralized lab of real mobile devices and emulators. With remote access, developers and testers can develop, debug, test, monitor, and optimize mobile apps from anywhere.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines

Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB

OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT Digital Lab