OpenText UFT Developer vs Tricentis Tosca comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

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
34
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis Tosca
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
102
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (1st), Regression Testing Tools (1st), API Testing Tools (2nd)
 

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 Tricentis Tosca is 19.8%, up from 15.8% 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
35.3%
Regression Testing Tools
29.7%
 

Featured Reviews

DS
Oct 25, 2020
Easy to use, the installation is clear, the support is good, and it has a good object recognition capability
In a very small location, we are using this solution for the infrastructure-related applications for testing and with a very low number of licenses, only two.  We are planning to change to SAP S/4HANA The cost is the most important factor in this tool. Feature-wise it's okay, and it's comparable…
SK
Jan 17, 2023
Affordable with helpful support and a simple interface
In Tosca, I see that there are no user guides. So basically, if you want to automate something, you have to really do some research and then start doing it. Having documentation would be helpful, and that is something that needs to be provided, maybe as a jump start to getting going with the product. There are certain engines that are available that will identify the objects. Yet, there are some engines that are not available, so we need to customize them. The setup can take a while as the licensing is confusing. The response time for support can be slow.

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 the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software."
"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"Integrates well with other products."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"The tool can be handled without any knowledge in parameterisation, especially the TestCaseDesign which makes the tool mighty and stable."
"Software testing tool that has multiple features. It's good to use for SAP testing, and it helps reduce test execution time."
"The most valuable feature of Tricentis Tosca is it is a completely scriptless automation tool, which I liked a lot. They keep on continuously improving their tools, wherever we are facing any challenges they are able to provide a solution for it. It is easy to learn, everyone can easily read and understand what is happening with the scripts. Any business user or function tester can use the tool efficiently. This is a complete solution package."
"We are satisfied with the support of Tricentis."
"We like the fact that it works across mobile, desktop, web, and APIs. Due to this, the solution has a broad range of applications."
"It can provide all levels of testing from design to execution to reporting."
"The low code is the best feature."
"Tricentis Tosca is a really cool tool that you don't have to be technical to use it. Additionally, the solution is easy to use. The modules, libraries, and reusable are in an efficient way to update all the tests. I find it spot on with that. We also started using the design which we switched from Excel. The design was superior to Excel."
 

Cons

"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."
"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 price of the solution could improve."
"The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"I would like to be able to manage different projects in one repository or have better data exchange between repositories."
"In Tosca, I see that there are no user guides."
"It is quite difficult to integrate the solution with other tools."
"The reporting function was lacking in usability and detail."
"I think the downside would be licensing costs which are very high."
"The solution needs to improve its simulation of mobile environments. Right now, that aspect is really lacking."
"They can make it more stable. I have used this tool for SAP applications. They have an alliance with SAP, and it mostly worked fine, but there were a few glitches. However, we got the required support from the Tricentis team. They are coming up with their new versions and upgrades with respect to how the Tricentis systems as cloud applications are updated, and it would be good if they have a robust accelerator pack."
"More and more artificial intelligence (AI) is coming in. So, some amount of AI to create natural language processing (NLP)-based test cases and manage defects would be very helpful. This is because the technologies have evolved in the last five to six months, so there is a potential opportunity there."
 

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."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"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."
"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
"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 pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
"Tricentis Tosca should improve its pricing. It is expensive."
"Pricing could be better."
"Expensive, but for long-term projects, it is paying back."
"Tricentis Tosca is an expensive tool and the licensing is not simple."
"A competitor of Tricentis Tosca: Katalon Studio, is very similar and offers lower pricing, though Tricentis Tosca offers more features and benefits."
"We hired a consultant to figure out all the tools in our company and how they fit in our company before we purchased the solution."
"The tool's pricing is lower than that of other automation tools."
"I am satisfied with the cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Insurance Company
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 resources in India due to its market leadership.
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.
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...
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 scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...
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
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
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 OpenText UFT Developer vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: June 2024.
793,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.