OpenText UFT One vs ReadyAPI comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
OpenText Logo
11,332 views|6,976 comparisons
87% willing to recommend
SmartBear Logo
3,008 views|1,685 comparisons
85% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and ReadyAPI based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI Report (Updated: March 2024).
768,857 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well.""UFT has improved our ability to regression test.""UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support.""The initial setup is relatively easy.""Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate.""I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code.""The stop automation is a great feature.""The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."

More OpenText UFT One Pros →

"The great thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a wide variety of functions. You can test any API that you come across. You are not limited to one type of API. It supports many APIs.""One of the features of ReadyAPI that's worth mentioning is that it allows you to parameterize. I'm working with more than two hundred resources, so I don't have to go and make a small change at each point every time. I have the option to just parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere. Another valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it provides a customized environment. In my company, you work in different environments, such as QA, UAT, and LT, so the URLs for every environment are different. In ReadyAPI, you can customize your environment, set it up, then start working on it. Another feature worth mentioning that's offered in ReadyAPI is automating your test value as the tool allows Groovy scripting. In your test case, you can use a Groovy script that says that in a particular test case, you have ten resources, but you just want to exhibit five and that you don't want to exhibit the remaining five. You can write a small Groovy script that lets you execute just five resources out of the ten resources. I also like that ReadyAPI allows you to read the data from CFC and Excel. It also allows you to create or customize your data, but that only works at a certain point because every application has its specific data. ReadyAPI cannot generate every data, but when I'm posting and I want to generate a random name, such as a first name, I can do it in ReadyAPI. The tool also has many different features which I find valuable, including Git integration.""It can create stress tests very fast, and some features help you do it fast.""The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the scripting tools and the connectivity to external data sources, such as Excel and PDF files. There are plenty of useful features that are useful, such as automating flexibility and usability. Overall, the solution is easy to use.""The initial setup of ReadyAPI is straightforward.""It's easy to learn how to use it.""This solution is very intuitive. Once you finish your first few testing cases, you can change several parameters and create lots of testing cases. You could use the same testing cases for different purposes such as automation, performance and screen testing.""The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities."

More ReadyAPI Pros →

Cons
"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function.""I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps.""Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient.""One area for improvement is its occasional slowness.""There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT.""Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent.""Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field.""UFT has a recording feature. They could make the recording feature window bigger for whatever activities that I am recording. It would improve the user experience if they could create a separate floating panel (or have it automatically show on the side) once the recording starts."

More OpenText UFT One Cons →

"Lacking flexibility of adding more custom verification for security testing.""It is challenging doing upgrades and patches because sometimes the environmental variables or suits in the projects get erased.""The UI is not user-friendly.""To generate a test suite in API, I had to create a separate one each time because otherwise it was just override the test. Each API had to be added separately. I thought I could just have one and then create different methods, but I had to add each API separately to create the test for that. That is an area that could be improved.""ReadyAPI's customer support isn't that great, particularly their response time.""Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions.""Better compatibility or more support for the older versions would be helpful.""ReadyAPI can improve because it is limited to only SOAP and REST services. They should update the solution to include more protocols so that other people are not limited to SOAP and REST services. Other than would be able to utilize it."

More ReadyAPI Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
  • "The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
  • "It's an expensive solution."
  • "For the price of five automation licenses, you simply would not be able to hire five manual testers for two years worth of 24/7 manual testing work on demand."
  • "The price is only $3,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company. Probably no more than five or 10. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't see that being an issue."
  • "The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""
  • "The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."
  • "The price is one aspect that could be improved."
  • More OpenText UFT One Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "This is a cheap solution when you consider the money that will be saved in testing."
  • "The cost of a license is probably around $1,000 to $2,000. Accounting is done by my leadership. I am more into implementations and making sure all things and processes are taken care of and the frameworks are maintained and managed."
  • "There are costs in addition to the licensing fee. For example, if you want to add the load testing you would pay more."
  • "The price of the solution has been fine."
  • "The price was around $6,000 for one license, but I don't remember exactly. It is definitely expensive. Our organization was planning on having multiple licenses for this year."
  • "For each license, they charge the same amount, which is less than $1,000 for each desktop license."
  • "The thing with ReadyAPI is that you have to buy different licenses for different purposes."
  • "We have approximately 12 licenses in place. There are other solutions that are more expensive than ReadyAPI that have more features, but if the scope of the project is limited to SOAP and REST service, then this is the best option."
  • More ReadyAPI Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    768,857 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.
    Top Answer:The product wasn't easy for developers to learn and pick up in the area revolving around scripting for automation, and there was a lot of resistance from developers, causing my company to rely on… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are its robust functionality and collaboration capabilities.
    Top Answer:The cost of the license is quite high. The licensing cost for ReadyAPI, at least for the current license I have, covers both general and security testing.
    Top Answer:There is room for improvement in ReadyAPI, particularly in the user interface. I prefer working with multiple windows or tabs, like in SoapUI, rather than the current single-window setup. It becomes… more »
    Ranking
    2nd
    Views
    11,332
    Comparisons
    6,976
    Reviews
    20
    Average Words per Review
    694
    Rating
    7.9
    8th
    Views
    3,008
    Comparisons
    1,685
    Reviews
    23
    Average Words per Review
    654
    Rating
    7.6
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)
    Ready API
    Learn More
    Overview
    Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications. Read white paper

    ReadyAPI is an all-in-one automated testing platform that allows teams to create, manage, and execute automated functional, security, and performance tests in one centralized interface.

    ReadyAPI Features

    Some of ReadyAPI’s key features include:

    • Continuous integration
    • Comprehensive dashboard
    • API discovery
    • Central, standardized reporting function
    • Plugin architecture
    • ReadyAPI Projects
    • Multiple options for scripting to create functional, load, or security tests

    ReadyAPI Benefits

    Some of the benefits of using ReadyAPI include:

    • Easy and flexible test creation and execution: ReadyAPI has visual editors and wizards that make testing easy, saving time and simplifying onboarding.

    • Test APIs continuously: With ReadyAPI you can run consistent tests on local environments, Docker containers, or other distributed staging environments.

    • Team friendly: ReadyAPI enables software teams with the ability to easily share testing projects and artifacts, share licenses between team members, and report issues directly from the testing IDE.

    • Powerful, data-driven testing capabilities: With ReadyAPI, you can save time by checking for numerous real world conditions.

    • Supports multiple specifications, schemas, and protocols: ReadyAPI includes legacy SOAP services, microservices powered by Apache Kafka, and mainstream REST services, as well as IoT use cases leveraging MQTT. It allows you to test and virtualize the most popular API protocols and also to import APIs from specifications and schemas instantly.

    Reviews from Real Users

    Below are some reviews and helpful feedback written by Dell EMC Unity users.

    PeerSpot user Vallalarasu P., Test Architect at a tech services company, states, “ReadyAPI is one of the best tools for API testing because they have made a single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and also service actualization. We also have virtual work that can be an add-in within ReadyAPI. For integration for CACD, they have something called TestEngine, which can also be an add-on for ReadyAPI. We use Python request library and things like that but if you're a bigger organization with hundreds of APIs, then ReadyAPI is a one-stop solution for complete API testing. If you consider TestComplete and other products for an equivalent outcome, you might get something nearly comparable, butReadyAPI is the outstanding product.”

    An IT Manager at an insurance company says the solution has “Fast automation, less coding, and is pretty lightweight. When you are working in sprints, you need to have continuous feedback. ReadyAPI definitely helps in automating very fast and rapidly. We have less coding, and we can more easily define our assertions. We don't use it for full-blown performance testing, but normally if you are doing your functional testing, it gives you the request and response time. Anybody who is doing functional testing can see what the request and response times are and raise a flag based upon their business affiliates, that is, whether it is meeting their affiliates. You can identify this during functional testing."

    Balamurugan A., Manager at a financial services firm, comments, “We like the user interface. The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools.

    They have interfaces with our performance tools, so we were able to leverage all of these integrations and plugins. It is very good from an integrative solution standpoint.”

    Sample Customers
    Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
    Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company16%
    Insurance Company10%
    Healthcare Company10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm19%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    Government6%
    REVIEWERS
    Insurance Company25%
    Financial Services Firm25%
    Healthcare Company13%
    Logistics Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Computer Software Company17%
    Insurance Company9%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise70%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise75%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise71%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise68%
    Buyer's Guide
    OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    768,857 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews while ReadyAPI is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while ReadyAPI is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI writes "Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite, whereas ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, ReadyAPI Test, Tricentis Tosca and ZAPTEST. See our OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI 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.