OpenText UFT Developer vs ReadyAPI comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT Developer
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
16th
Average Rating
7.4
Number of Reviews
34
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (14th)
ReadyAPI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
34
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (7th)
 

Market share comparison

As of June 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the market share of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.4% and it decreased by 31.1% compared to the previous year. The market share of ReadyAPI is 0.9% and it decreased by 59.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
Unique Categories:
Test Automation Tools
2.2%
Performance Testing Tools
2.8%
 

Featured Reviews

Eitan Gold - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 9, 2023
Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection
We use Micro Focus UFT Developer to perform functional testing on both a desktop application and a web application One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library. They have LeanFT Library. This is the reason we choose…
VP
Sep 27, 2022
Useful plugins, ready-to-use filters, and low maintenance
ReadyAPI can be used on the cloud and on-premise, and we are using both methods. We are using the solution locally as a server for test automation. It is local but we are also using Service Pro which is for virtualization and is on the cloud. The integration of the script happens on the dedicated…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."
"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."
"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
"The solution is very scalable."
"It is a product that can meet regulations of the banking industry."
"One of the important features, which speeds up the automation testing development with LeanFT, is its object repository functions. Object identification are the most time-consuming aspect of building automation tests. LeanFT gives that out of the box. It helps you identify the objects and after that, once you got the object in place, then it's just about building the test scripts. So it reduces your development time significantly."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us."
"It is the best solution you can get across the globe for API, test automation, and API penetration testing."
"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."
"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's easy to implement."
"The performance testing capabilities are very good."
"The initial setup of ReadyAPI is straightforward."
"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 the ready-to-use assertions and filters which can perform the validation. If we want to filter out any value, the filters are available. Apart from that database integration, if you want to go ahead and perform validation in the database layer it is possible with the ready-to-use feature available. The execution and reporting are rich features."
 

Cons

"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."
"The tool could be a little easier."
"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."
"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."
"The pricing could be improved."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"The support for .NET Framework and Visual Studio in Micro Focus UFT Developer is currently limited. At present, only Visual Studio 2019 is supported, despite the release of a newer version (2022). Similarly, the tool only supports up to .NET Framework version 4.3.8, while there have been six newer versions released. This is an area that could be improved upon, particularly in the Windows environment."
"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."
"The Property Transfer capability could be more user friendly because it is a bit difficult to understand."
"The reporting in ReadyAPI could be better. It can become sloppy, sometimes it works and other times it does not."
"It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today. Other solutions have an in-built mechanism where I can directly and easily connect. An API is more around a user submitting a request on the frontend. It then hits the backend, puts the data, and responds back. If I am hitting MongoDB or NoSQL databases, I do not have ready-made inbuilt solutions in ReadyAPI that can easily help me in automating it faster. In our organization, we deal with NoSQL databases, and therefore, we need Groovy. We just cannot have a connector from ReadyAPI to do that. I have to write Groovy scripts. If you have themes that are predominantly using MongoDB, it leads to more maintenance and support activity because we are introducing more code into our commission. In terms of additional features, it can have cloud support. This is one of the things where we are getting into cloud support. We'll see how it works, but it is one of the doubts that we still have."
"What needs improvement in ReadyAPI is its load testing feature because there was a hiccup when my team performed some load testing on the tool. My team had meetings with the ReadyAPI team and tried to get that issue fixed, but it still hasn't improved. This is a shortcoming of the tool, especially when you compare it with HP LoadRunner."
"I don't like how they don't have a clear way to manage tests between multiple projects."
"The overall scope of this solution is limited and could be improved."
"In terms of features, I have already raised different change requests on the ReadyAPI side. One of the largest functions I've requested is the validation of the payload for the REST APIs."
"Better compatibility or more support for the older versions would be helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
"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."
"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
"If I remember correctly, ReadyAPI costs between $5,000 to $7,000 for five thousand virtual users running it at a given point in time. Other tools, for example, Apache JMeter, can run millions of users at a given time. ReadyAPI is a tool that requires you to pay more money if you want more users to run it for performance testing. For functional testing, each ReadyAPI license costs $1,000, and you do get basic testing, and it's inclusive of one hundred users. In my company, if there's a need for more than one hundred users, my team uses Apache JMeter because it's futile to end up paying $5,000 or $6,000 annually just for performance testing, which can be done in Apache JMeter as well. Given the circumstances, my team does performance testing only towards the end of the fiscal year when the regulatory testing of applications takes place. If I have to run ReadyAPI just for two days or just for ten or fifteen odd days, then it's not worth paying $5,000 for the license with the small number of users provided by ReadyAPI."
"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."
"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."
"It is expensive. Each user needs to be licensed, and there are different licenses within the product. It starts with 750 euros for a single user per year, but for the full product features, you need to pay a lot more. There are three versions. This cost is for functional testing, and then there is a cost for load testing and virtual services. If you want to use these areas with the functional test license, you are limited. You hit some limits in these functions. If you have all three licenses, then you have full functionality for the API."
"We use fixed licenses, and the last time I checked, I want to say it's around $680 per seat per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
17%
Insurance Company
8%
Government
7%
 

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.
What do you like most about ReadyAPI?
The performance testing capabilities are very good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI?
The pricing is very competitive. It has a good impact on our time-to-market metrics. We have the complete SmartBear environment. The single cost for all the services makes it easier.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI?
The vendor conducts webinars. They must do it more, though. The solution must update SmartBear Academy. The content on ReadyAPI in SmartBear Academy is outdated.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
Ready API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT Developer vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: June 2024.
787,061 professionals have used our research since 2012.