OpenText UFT Developer vs Oracle Application Testing Suite comparison

OpenText and Oracle are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #13 with an average rating of 7.8, while Oracle is ranked #25. OpenText holds a 2.6% mindshare in FT, compared to Oracle’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 77% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of Oracle users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT Developer

Read 38 OpenText UFT Developer reviews

1,882 Views
1,294 Comparison Views

77% willing to recommend

Oracle Application Testing ...

Read 24 Oracle Application Testing Suite reviews

955 Views
554 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Developer

Oracle Application Testing ...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Oracle Application Testing Suite and OpenText UFT Developer are comprehensive testing tools. Oracle Application Testing Suite has a stronger integration with Oracle applications, making it a preferred choice for Oracle-specific environments.

Features: Oracle Application Testing Suite offers seamless automation, load testing, and strong Oracle ERP integration. UFT Developer supports multiple programming languages, provides developer-friendly features, and integrates with popular tools.

Room for Improvement: Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve object identification and browser compatibility. UFT Developer might enhance object recognition and scripting speed while expanding support for MacOS.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Oracle Application Testing Suite offers mainly on-premises deployment with excellent customer support. UFT Developer provides flexible deployment options, including public cloud, with mixed customer support feedback.

Pricing and ROI: Oracle Application Testing Suite is cost-effective, often bundled with Oracle products and seen as offering substantial ROI. UFT Developer is considered expensive with flexible licensing options but high fees.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT Developer vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite

April 2025

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)

Oracle Application Testing ...

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

25th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (14th), Load Testing Tools (15th)

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 Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.2%, down from 1.2% 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

Rishabh-Sharma

Senior Engineer at Cignity Technology

Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy

Oracle Application Testing Suite can improve by covering more browsers as compared to other solutions because they're considering the Edge browser as well, but the solution is working on different Windows operating platforms. For example, in our current Windows 2012 R2 server, if I want to automate the Edge browser, I need to upgrade that particular Windows to Windows 10.1 or some other Windows platform, because it's not supported in Windows 2012 feature. That is an issue. If cross-browsers can be incorporated, then support should be provided. There should be a single operating system where everything can be incorporated. I have faced issues with some indexing items. For example, the solution is able to derive some properties from the screen, such as button locations or text locations, but there are some elements, for example, unnamed buttons or text, where there is no name or ID or any other identifying information. Indexing doesn't always work, and we have to go to those elements manually and inspect them to determine their class, and then input that information into the system.

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 Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software."

"The solution is very scalable."

"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."

"OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio."

"I like the tool because we can still access the devices' distance. It's not important where you're working. For example, I can use it in Brazil, Chile, and other parts where people are working. After the pandemic, many companies use it for homework. I think using it to administer and manage the devices is very good and effective."

"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."

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

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."

"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."

"The solution is scalable."

"The function test feature is valuable."

"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."

"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."

"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."

"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."

More Oracle Application Testing Suite pros

Cons

"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."

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

"There's room for improvement, especially when I compare OpenText to newer tools like NeoLoad."

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

"The price of the solution could improve."

"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."

"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."

More OpenText UFT Developer cons

"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."

"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."

"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."

"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."

"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."

"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."

"I would like to see better dashboards."

"I have faced issues with some indexing items."

More Oracle Application Testing Suite cons

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."

"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."

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

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

"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."

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

More OpenText UFT Developer pricing and cost advice

"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."

"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."

"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."

"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."

"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."

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

17%

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

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?

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, ...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Developer

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

Tricentis Tosca vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 35% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 21% of the time

Apache JMeter vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 11% of the time

OpenText LoadRunner Professional vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 10% of the time

SoftLogica WAPT Pro vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 6% of the time

More Oracle Application Testing Suite Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer

April 2025

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

Buyer's Guide

Oracle Application Testing Suite

April 2025

Download Oracle Application Testing Suite product report

Also Known As

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

OATS

Overview

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

OpenText

Application Testing Suite is a comprehensive, integrated testing solution that ensures the quality, scalability, and availability of your Web applications, Web Services, packaged Oracle Applications and Oracle databases.

Oracle

Sample Customers

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

Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite

April 2025

Free Report: OpenText UFT Developer vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT Developer vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite report.

See our list of best Functional 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.