OpenText UFT One vs Testim comparison

Read 10 Testim reviews

1,629 Views
1,150 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT One and Testim compete in the automated testing domain, with data comparisons suggesting Testim might have an edge due to its advanced features and perceived value, despite OpenText UFT One's pricing and support advantages.

Features: OpenText UFT One provides comprehensive support for a variety of applications and languages, robust test management, and extensive coverage for detailed oversight. Testim is focused on AI-driven testing, which increases speed and efficiency, and supports seamless integration with modern CI/CD pipelines.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT One could enhance its cloud integration, reduce setup complexity, and improve user interface modernization. Testim may benefit from expanding application support, increasing customization options, and providing more detailed documentation for complex environments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText UFT One offers a traditional deployment model with thorough enterprise-level support, though it may demand more setup resources. Testim's cloud-based model enables fast adoption and integration, emphasizing accessibility and real-time customer support for agile responses and swifter deployment.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One incurs a higher setup cost but offers value through extensive capabilities resulting in long-term ROI. Testim's flexible pricing appeals to teams seeking scalability and a faster ROI turnaround due to AI enhancements and streamlined operations.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. Testim Report (Updated: April 2025).

OpenText UFT One vs. Testim

Download the complete report

Helped 849,686 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

Ranking in Test Automation 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 (6th)

Testim

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

11th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

7th

Average Rating

9.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

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 Testim is 3.3%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Don Ingerson

QA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

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

PiyushSingh

Director at Xceedance

A stable tool to help users take care of the implementation phases in their environment

There are a few minor areas where improvements are required, but they are not something that I can discuss at a high level. I will have to ask the team that uses Testim since they can give a better response to what requires improvement in the product. I only manage the team that uses Testim. I cannot be exactly described as an end user of the tool. There were some issues in the product's initial setup phase in regard to the area of documentation since it wasn't very easy to understand everything mentioned in it. There were some trial and error methods our company had to deal with while using the product's documentation, after which we were able to get through the setup phase. I want the documentation to have more information to help users with the setup process. I want the product to be more scalable in the future.

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

"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."

"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."

"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."

"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."

"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."

"Hidden among the kitchen sink of features is a new Data Generation tool called the Test Combinations Generator."

"It offers a wide range of testing."

"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."

More OpenText UFT One pros

"The tool's most valuable feature is the recently added AI feature."

"We added Testim to our CI flow. It allows us to test only tasks that already passed sanity tests."

"The REST API features allowed integrated testing for select products to quickly make calls and test the UIs with API calls while the CLI allows us to matrix the grid function across browsers."

"The automating smoke and regression tests have become easier and handier and manual efforts are saved."

"I have seen reduced maintenance due to smart locators, as it automatically finds locators for us even with minor application changes."

"It is a highly stable solution."

"The feature I like most about Testim is the record and playback capability, which does not require writing a lot of code."

"The ease of learning and the small learning curve allowed us to scale the test scripts and the test suite quickly."

More Testim pros

Cons

"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 specialist resources."

"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."

"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."

"One thing that confused me, and now just mildly irritates me, is that we migrated from QuickTest Pro to HP UFT, Unified Functional Test. After we did the migration, it turned out that we didn't really have Unified Functional Test at all."

"The scripting language could be improved. They're currently using Visual Basic, but I think that people need something more advanced, like Python or Java."

"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."

"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."

More OpenText UFT One cons

"The product's areas of improvement include pricing considerations and additional features related to visual testing and PDF handling."

"Faster scripting would be beneficial, as test creation is faster now."

"The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved."

"There were some issues in the product's initial setup phase in regard to the area of documentation since it wasn't very easy to understand everything mentioned in it."

"There are common properties between multiple elements that we should be able to edit - such as 'when this step fails,' 'when to run this step,' and 'override timeout'. I should be able to update these properties if I select multiple elements."

"There is currently no room for improvement that I can identify as of now."

"The UI could use a better design with a better user experience in mind."

"In the last couple of months, I have experienced some downtime where it wasn't working."

More Testim cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."

"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 licensing and pricing model is confusing."

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

"Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."

"HPE recently extended the demo license period from 30 days to 60 days which was a very wise and popular decision to give potential customers more time to install it and try it for free. Even if your company has a salesperson come in and demo UFT, I would highly encourage at least one of your developers or automation engineers to download and install it to explore for themselves the functionality and features included during the demo trial period."

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

"The price is reasonable."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

"The solution is not expensive."

"The tool offers a fixed pricing model for our company."

"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten compared to other tools."

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

849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Educational Organization

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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...

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.

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 ...

What do you like most about Testim?

The tool's most valuable feature is the recently added AI feature.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Testim?

I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten compared to other tools.

What needs improvement with Testim?

More advanced AI-based features and features on the API side would help us create better end-to-end test suites.

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One

Comparisons

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

Tricentis Tosca vs Testim

Compared 49% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Testim

Compared 21% of the time

Functionize vs Testim

Compared 13% of the time

Testsigma vs Testim

Compared 6% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs Testim

Compared 2% of the time

More Testim Competitors

Product Reports

OpenText UFT One

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Download Testim 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

Testim is an end-to-end agile testing automation solution which utilizes machine learning for test authoring, execution, and maintenance. Users can create tests in minutes, run thousands of tests in parallel across different browsers, integrate with their existing CI/CD and collaboration tools, and more.

Sample Customers

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

Microsoft, salesforce, JFrog, USA Today, Globality

OpenText UFT One vs. Testim