OpenText UFT Developer vs Qualitia Automation Studio comparison

OpenText and Qualitia Software are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. OpenText is ranked #11 with an average rating of 7.8, while Qualitia Software is ranked #34. OpenText holds a 2.3% mindshare in TAt, compared to Qualitia Software’s 0.1% mindshare. Additionally, 77% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Qualitia Software users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT Developer

Read 38 OpenText UFT Developer reviews

1,641 Views
172 Comparison Views

77% willing to recommend

Qualitia Automation Studio

Read 5 Qualitia Automation Studio reviews

205 Views
30 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Developer

Qualitia Automation Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Qualitia Automation Studio and OpenText UFT Developer compete in the test automation category. OpenText UFT Developer is leading due to its robust features and capabilities, even though it might cost more initially.

Features: Qualitia Automation Studio is recognized for its scriptless automation, quick test creation, and easy integration. OpenText UFT Developer provides rich scripting flexibility, support for numerous technologies, and seamless CI/CD pipeline integration.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Qualitia Automation Studio offers straightforward deployment and responsive customer service, ensuring rapid implementation and support. OpenText UFT Developer has a full-featured deployment process with comprehensive documentation and dedicated support, although it can be more complex.

Pricing and ROI: Qualitia Automation Studio presents a competitive setup cost and favorable ROI due to efficient test development and execution time. OpenText UFT Developer, while possibly costlier upfront, delivers significant ROI through improved test coverage and reliability.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT Developer vs. Qualitia Automation Studio Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer vs. Qualitia Automation Studio

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 857,162 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 Test Automation Tools

11th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (12th)

Qualitia Automation Studio

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

34th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.3%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualitia Automation Studio is 0.1%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation 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

Suvardhana Yathiraj

Head Of Solutions at Test Yantra Software Solutions

Testing automation solution that is scriptless and is competitively priced compared to other solutions

The best feature of this solution is the fact that it offers scriptless automation. You don't need to know how to code or program to use it. Within four weeks, my team was up and running. This was the shortest possible ramp-up that we completed in my entire career The integrations for this…

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 cost is the most important factor in this tool."

"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."

"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."

"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."

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

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

"The most valuable features are the object repository."

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

"The best feature of this solution is the fact that it offers scriptless automation. You don't need to know how to code or program to use it."

Cons

"In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary. This limits the technology's ability to recognize every object."

"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."

"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

"The integrations for this solutions could be improved, specifically for Slack."

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

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

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

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

"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."

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

More OpenText UFT Developer pricing and cost advice

"Pricing is on a higher end but the competition was even more expensive. With this considered, it is a competitive solution."

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

20%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Insurance Company

22%

Financial Services Firm

22%

Hospitality Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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 price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?

In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary. This limits the technology's ability to recognize every object.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 57% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 16% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

IBM DevOps Test UI vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText UFT Developer Competitors

Selenium HQ vs Qualitia Automation Studio

Compared 100% of the time

More Qualitia Automation Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer

May 2025

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

Buyer's Guide

Test Automation Tools

May 2025

Download Qualitia Automation Studio product report

Also Known As

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

No data available

Overview

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

OpenText

Qualitia gives you simple step wise approach to quickly build your test automation and handle complexities easily with its unique scriptless approach. Qualitia gives you smart alerts and analysis to adopt changes effectively, making it agile friendly.

Qualitia Software

Sample Customers

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

Springer, PTC, ZS, Shaadi.com, JDA, Cbazaar

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer vs. Qualitia Automation Studio

April 2025

Free Report: OpenText UFT Developer vs. Qualitia Automation Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT Developer vs. Qualitia Automation Studio and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. Qualitia Automation Studio report.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Automation 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.