We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and Testim 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."I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"The stop automation is a great feature."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."
"UFT has improved our ability to regression test."
"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."
"Testim introduces three services covering validation steps, eliminating the necessity to write complex code."
"The automating smoke and regression tests have become easier and handier and manual efforts are saved."
"We added Testim to our CI flow. It allows us to test only tasks that already passed sanity tests."
"The pre-defined tests are a great help, specifically the custom JS test that allows us to be able to use custom code to test complicated elements or scenarios."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the recently added AI feature."
"It is a highly stable solution."
"The product is easy to use."
"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."
"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."
"Technical support could be improved."
"The solution does not have proper scripting."
"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."
"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."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."
"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."
"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."
"The product's areas of improvement include pricing considerations and additional features related to visual testing and PDF handling."
"I get a little bit confused while creating new branches."
"Testim sometimes fails due to stability issues. It doesn't always work consistently, especially after running multiple tests."
"The UI could use a better design with a better user experience in mind."
"The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved."
"The accessibility reporting features could be more robust to be reported at the script level and allow users to map down to the step level."
"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."
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews while Testim is ranked 17th in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while Testim is rated 9.2. 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 Testim writes "A stable tool to help users take care of the implementation phases in their environment". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite, whereas Testim is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Functionize, Applitools and Testsigma. See our OpenText UFT One vs. Testim report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation 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.
