OpenText UFT One vs SmartBear TestLeft comparison

OpenText and SmartBear are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 7.7, while SmartBear is ranked #36. OpenText holds a 9.9% mindshare in FT, compared to SmartBear’s 0.2% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of SmartBear users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT One

Read 96 OpenText UFT One reviews

6,736 Views
4,304 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

SmartBear TestLeft

Read 1 SmartBear TestLeft review

201 Views
148 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

SmartBear TestLeft

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

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

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Functional Testing Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 851,451 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 One

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (7th), Test Automation Tools (3rd)

SmartBear TestLeft

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

36th

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 9.9%, up from 9.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestLeft is 0.2%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Don Ingerson

Sr. QA Automation Engineer at a manufacturing company with 11-50 employees

With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results

With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files. For Web browsers, UFT 12.54 supports IE9, IE10, IE11, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome (versions 31.0 to 54.9), Firefox (versions 27.0 to 49.0). Besides GUI testing, UFT supports database testing and API testing (Docker, WSDL, and SOAP). For the first time ever, HP started to expand the testing capabilities of UFT (QTP) beyond Windows beginning with UFT 12.00. A UFT user can now run tests on Web applications on a Safari browser that is running on a remote Mac computer.

Read full review

reviewer1378161

Sr. Consultant at Aspire Systems

Simple to set up and the test execute feature is helpful, but the cost could be reduced

Our primary use case is Point of Sale (POS) testing The most valuable features are test executor and development. TestLeft captures a lot of space in terms of memory, which is one issue that can be improved. We have been using SmartBear TestLeft for the past month. Stability-wise, TestLeft is…

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

"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."

"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."

"The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."

"The solution has good out-of-the-box protocols."

"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."

"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."

"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."

"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."

More OpenText UFT One pros

"The most valuable features are test executor and development."

Cons

"The user interface could be improved"

"The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails."

"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis."

"They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost."

"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."

"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."

"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."

"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

"TestLeft captures a lot of space in terms of memory, which is one issue that can be improved."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's an expensive solution."

"The pricing of the product is an issue."

"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."

"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."

"The price is reasonable."

"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."

"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."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

"The cost should be reduced."

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

851,451 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

17%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT One?

My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?

OpenText UFT One required knowledge of VBScript, which is a limited version of Visual Basic. We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory ...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 31% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 12% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 8% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 7% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

SmartBear TestComplete vs SmartBear TestLeft

Compared 100% of the time

More SmartBear TestLeft Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

May 2025

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download SmartBear TestLeft product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro

No data available

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

OpenText

SmartBear TestLeft a functional testing tool fully embedded in standard IDEs. TestLeft is a powerful yet lean functional testing tool for dev-testers working in Agile teams. It fully embeds into standard development IDEs. A built-in access to object and method library is also available with TestLeft. Dev-testers can thereby easily and quickly create robust functional automated tests without leaving their favorite IDEs such as Visual Studio. It also works well with other tools in dev eco-systems such as source control or continuous integration systems.

SmartBear

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services

American Red Cross, CISCO, HONDA, ADIDAS, TBC bank

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, UiPath and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

851,451 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.