Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs SmartBear TestComplete vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
5.9
OpenText Functional Testing reduces test automation time and costs, increasing ROI by 70-80% compared to manual testing.
Sentiment score
6.8
SmartBear TestComplete automation saves time, enhances client satisfaction, and boosts efficiency, with annual savings of approximately $10,000.
Sentiment score
6.9
Tricentis Tosca offers high ROI by reducing test times and labor, with full CI integration enhancing productivity and market speed.
Once set up, only one person is needed to handle all tasks, reducing the requirement for multiple personnel.
Tasks that typically take ten hours are reduced to two to three hours, representing a threefold productivity gain.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
5.6
OpenText Functional Testing support is generally effective but inconsistent, with improvements noted and suggestions for enhancing responsiveness.
Sentiment score
6.9
SmartBear TestComplete's customer support is knowledgeable but inconsistent, with delays and unresolved issues needing faster escalation and responses.
Sentiment score
6.8
Tricentis Tosca's support is praised for expertise and speed, but users note response delays and reliance on generic answers.
Initially, it was quite poor, but it seems they are making efforts to improve.
For technical support, I would give them an eight because whenever we have a concern, they immediately reach out to us.
My experience has been positive; their response to emails or phone calls in tech support is fast, usually between eight to ten hours.
Response through chat has been replaced by chatbots, which has impacted the experience.
They provide 24/7 support with resolution times within one to two hours.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
OpenText Functional Testing offers scalability, supports diverse ecosystems, and enhances integration, though resource consumption is a noted limitation.
Sentiment score
7.4
SmartBear TestComplete is scalable and adaptable, with flexible scripting, but may require licensing for wider deployment.
Sentiment score
7.3
Tricentis Tosca is highly scalable, supporting enterprise environments with robust automation, despite integration challenges and licensing considerations.
Scalability is excellent with Tricentis Tosca.
It covers a breadth of applications and products, demonstrating excellent scalability that I have seen in reality.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
Experiences with OpenText Testing vary; some face stability issues, but recent improvements enhance reliability compared to competitors.
Sentiment score
6.9
SmartBear TestComplete generally stable, but users report crashes, memory leaks, and HTML5 testing delays in certain scenarios.
Sentiment score
7.4
Tricentis Tosca is generally stable, with occasional issues like connection drops, licensing complexity, and performance in large projects.
We regularly update the product, and overall, it is stable.
For performance and stability, Tricentis Tosca deserves a 10 out of 10.
The stability of Tricentis Tosca is rated ten out of ten. It is very stable.
I find stability issues when using the Vision AI feature; Tricentis Tosca is not very stable.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText Functional Testing requires enhanced integration, stability, performance, and accessibility for broader technology, mobile support, and modernized interfaces.
SmartBear TestComplete faces challenges in object recognition, integrations, licensing, performance, and support across browsers and mobile devices.
Tricentis Tosca struggles with high costs, steep learning curve, limited features, and integration issues, impacting user experience significantly.
In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary.
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to improve some performance aspects, especially the image comparison feature.
Moving to a cloud-based application rather than a desktop one could improve Tosca.
If a button in an application changes, Tricentis Tosca should be smart enough to detect the change and still execute the script seamlessly.
The Vision AI implementation works very slowly, affecting the speed of our work.
 

Setup Cost

Enterprise users find OpenText Functional Testing costly, preferring open-source alternatives, with high setup and licensing fees.
SmartBear TestComplete's pricing and licensing receive mixed reviews, seen as both reasonable and costly depending on usage and modules.
Tricentis Tosca's high cost suits large enterprises, offering comprehensive automation features that justify its expense over cheaper alternatives.
The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.
The pricing for Tricentis Tosca is extremely high, and I rate it as ten in terms of expense.
A yearly license costs around 20,000 euros.
For enterprise customers, the cost is manageable because it provides solutions for multiple applications they want to automate.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText Functional Testing offers flexibility, integration, and developer-friendly features, enhancing productivity and efficiency with strong stability and automation.
SmartBear TestComplete excels in cross-platform automation, integration, and support for multiple languages, enhancing automated testing efficiency and maintenance.
Tricentis Tosca offers scriptless, model-based test automation, supporting diverse technologies with ease, efficiency, and robust user experience.
OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio.
The most valuable feature of SmartBear TestComplete for me is the image comparison functionality.
The modular approach reduces scripting effort by at least fifty percent, which significantly cuts down on the script development time.
The most useful features of Tricentis Tosca include API scanning, basic web application automation, and data validation capabilities.
It allows for drag-and-drop functionality and demo automation in SAP-based applications, which can be challenging with other automation tools.
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 2.8%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 4.9%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tricentis Tosca is 18.9%, up from 17.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Eitan Gold - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Prakhar Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation
The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.
PrabhuKrishnamoorthy - PeerSpot reviewer
Has transformed testing by reducing scripting effort and enhancing productivity with advanced features
The self-healing feature of Tricentis Tosca needs significant improvement. Currently, it is static and not dynamic. For example, if a button in an application changes, Tricentis Tosca should be smart enough to detect the change and still execute the script seamlessly. Improvements are needed to ensure it responds dynamically to changes in the application.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
5%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Retailer
6%
 

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 resour...
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 vali...
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 a...
What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?
TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?
I am not involved in pricing or licensing; our management team handles these aspects.
What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?
While using SmartBear TestComplete, we are fine with the current capabilities, however, it would be beneficial to imp...
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...
How does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?
Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is...
What do you like most about Tricentis Tosca?
For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.
HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: July 2025.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.