We performed a comparison between Micro Focus UFT Developer and Micro Focus UFT One based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.

Ease of Deployment: Most users feel the deployment of both solutions is easy and straightforward.

Features: Micro Focus UFT Developer users feel the solution is stable for desktop UI and mobile-based applications, user-friendly, and offers great object repository features. Users would like to see better integration with other solutions at a lower cost.

Micro Focus UFT One users like the fluid automation features with various technologies, which helps to identify anomalies earlier and cut costs significantly. The solution offers seamless integration with many of today’s popular solutions, however it can be very heavy, slow, and a bit buggy at times. Users feel overall that the user interface is a bit dated and needs an update.

Users of both solutions would like them to be more scriptless.

Pricing: Users of both solutions feel the licensing and pricing can be very expensive.

Service and Support: Users of both solutions tell us there is room for improvement regarding the service and support.

Comparison Results: Micro Focus UFT One ranks higher in this comparison. It is more up-to-date and provides for better integration with many of today's popular solutions and technologies.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One Report (Updated: June 2024).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One

June 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 793,295 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT Developer

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

16th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

15th

Average Rating

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText UFT One

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th)

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.4%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 9.9%, down from 11.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Unique Categories:

Test Automation Tools

2.3%

Mobile App Testing Tools

30.7%

Regression Testing Tools

16.2%

Q&A Highlights

Subhash Pasupuleti

Framework Architect and Test Automation Specialist at NJ Judiciary

Dec 01, 2021

Which product supports Cross Browser Testing: UFT Developer or UFT One?

UFT One is the one you need.

See all answers

Featured Reviews

TestMana6b72

Research & Development Engineer at a insurance company with 201-500 employees

Aug 19, 2019

Helps to determine problem areas but it has many problems and limitations

As far as things that can be improved, it is a good solution so I think I can only do a comparison. We also use QC/ALM (Application Lifecycle Management [Quality Center]). It's a global solution that is managed with information from UFC from all over the environment. It has to be integrated with UFT. Really UFT could have this functionality built-in. We have 40% advantages and 60% disadvantages in our setup of UFT. This is because with UFT, we also have the problem that we have to use Windows Server and I would like to use Linux. For Selenium, we can use Linux so we have good performance. But we can't use UFT with Linux. It is impossible because in UFT we have to develop for UFT with VBScript and VBScript is only for windows and not for Linux. Another problem currently with the UFT — I think it is resolved in the new generation of UFT — is that we can't run tasks in parallel. In the new version, we can improve our workflow if we can choose to allow multiple tasks at runtime. So there is a problem with that currently. In Selenium, our development is done with Java technology — J2EE. So if we have an online community and we have a Selenium grid, we can run multiple tasks in realtime. We can't do that in UFT now because of its requirements, so it's a problem for us. When they come out with a solution for this issue, the product can be more flexible like Selenium and it will be a great benefit to us. To make UFT better, Micro Focus has to make UFT work in a stable environment. Right now, UFT is a problem all the time. It would help to have a community and a special forum for UFT, and even that is missing. We have good forums in Java and for Selenium, so it is possible to get solutions easily for those products. I think it would not be hard to do for UFT, and it would be better for UFT users if we had a good website. Users could help themselves and share knowledge and address problems and make up for the lack of support. We also don't have training for UFT. It is like they just made a product and don't care to support it. It is a good product, but not so perfect that it doesn't need support. I have to go to France to get certified. We don't have that ability here in Morocco. We cannot send everyone there, so it is a problem.

Read full review

Don Ingerson

QA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

Sep 29, 2022

With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results

With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files. For Web browsers, UFT 12.54 supports IE9, IE10, IE11, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome (versions 31.0 to 54.9), Firefox (versions 27.0 to 49.0). Besides GUI testing, UFT supports database testing and API testing (Docker, WSDL, and SOAP). For the first time ever, HP started to expand the testing capabilities of UFT (QTP) beyond Windows beginning with UFT 12.00. A UFT user can now run tests on Web applications on a Safari browser that is running on a remote Mac computer.

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

"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."

"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."

"The most valuable feature for me is the number of protocols that can be tested. It not only tests Web, but also SAP, Siebel, .Net, and even pdf."

"The most valuable feature is stability."

"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."

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

"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."

"I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."

"UFT has improved our ability to regression test."

"One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA."

"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."

"It's simple to set up."

"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."

"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."

More OpenText UFT One pros

Cons

"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise."

"The pricing could be improved."

"The support for .NET Framework and Visual Studio in Micro Focus UFT Developer is currently limited. At present, only Visual Studio 2019 is supported, despite the release of a newer version (2022). Similarly, the tool only supports up to .NET Framework version 4.3.8, while there have been six newer versions released. This is an area that could be improved upon, particularly in the Windows environment."

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

"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."

"The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement."

"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."

"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."

More OpenText UFT Developer cons

"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."

"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."

"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."

"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."

"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."

"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."

"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."

"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."

More OpenText UFT One cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

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

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

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

"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."

"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."

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

More OpenText UFT Developer pricing and cost advice

"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."

"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."

"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."

"It's an expensive solution."

"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."

"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."

"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

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

793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Answers from the Community

Subhash Pasupuleti

Framework Architect and Test Automation Specialist at NJ Judiciary

Dec 1, 2021

Which product supports Cross Browser Testing: UFT Developer or UFT One?

See 2 answers

StephenDavis

Founder and CEO at a computer software company with 1-10 employees

Jan 11, 2021

Hi Subhash. Both tools can: UFT One - allows you to automate functional and regression testing for the widest range of applications and technologies can supports testing GUI, web, mobile or API applications. UFT Developer - is powerful and lightweight functional automation software for Agile and DevOps teams, built specifically for continuous testing and continuous integration. It allows you to create tests in your favourite IDEs and to write robust and reusable test automation scripts using JavaScript, Java or C#. Get fast feedback from your test execution with the lightweight but detailed results report. UFT One includes a licence to UFT Developer. If you don't need the additional support in UFT One, the UFT Developer is the tool you need.

Read full answer

Diego Caicedo Lescano

Chief Innovation Officer at SAGGA

Dec 1, 2021

UFT One is the one you need.

Read full answer

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

22%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

19%

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Government

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.

See all answers

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

The pricing is competitive. It is affordable and average.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?

Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?

The tool needs to improve its performance since it can become heavy.

See all answers

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 20% of the time

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 5% of the time

Original Software TestDrive vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

Qt Squish vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText UFT Developer Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 29% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 11% of the time

UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 6% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 5% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer

July 2024

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

July 2024

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Also Known As

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

Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)

Learn More

OpenText

Overview

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

Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications. Read white paper

Sample Customers

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

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One

June 2024

Free Report: OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One and other solutions. Updated: June 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation Tools vendors, and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.