OpenText UFT Developer vs Qualitia Automation Studio comparison

OpenText and Qualitia Software are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. OpenText is ranked #13 with an average rating of 7.8, while Qualitia Software is ranked #33. OpenText holds a 2.4% 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

1,860 Views
1,266 Comparison Views

77% willing to recommend

Qualitia Automation Studio

Read 5 Qualitia Automation Studio reviews

209 Views
89 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 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 Test Automation Tools

13th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (13th)

Qualitia Automation Studio

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

33rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.4%, 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

it_user189918

QA Engineer at a tech company with 51-200 employees

Good Tool for Non Technical Users.

I think Qualitia's scriptless test automation tool is best used on teams that have Manual QA Testers who are looking to start to automate regression tests but are not very technical in nature. I think recognizing the overall strategy of implementing a test automation solution is extremely important when choosing a tool. If the tests are just going to be run from a local machine, then maybe a full solution like this is not what you need. But if you want to run tests on different servers and have them included in your build process, then a solution like Qualitia would help your team out. Just remember that Qualitia's technical support team is really something that will set their product apart from other similar solutions. They really do care about their customers success.

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

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

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

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

"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."

"Integrates well with other products."

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

"The most valuable feature is stability."

"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

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

"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 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."

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

"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."

"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."

"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."

More OpenText UFT Developer cons

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

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

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

"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."

"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."

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

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

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

23%

Insurance Company

21%

Government

Computer Software Company

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?

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

Selenium HQ vs Qualitia Automation Studio

Compared 100% of the time

More Qualitia Automation Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer

April 2025

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

Buyer's Guide

Test Automation Tools

April 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

850,028 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.