ACCELQ Automate vs OpenText UFT Developer comparison

ACCELQ and OpenText are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. ACCELQ is ranked #18 with an average rating of 9.0, while OpenText is ranked #10 with an average rating of 7.8. ACCELQ holds a 1.2% mindshare in TAt, compared to OpenText’s 2.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of ACCELQ users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 76% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

ACCELQ Automate

Read 1 ACCELQ Automate review

836 Views
680 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Developer

Read 37 OpenText UFT Developer reviews

2,202 Views
1,451 Comparison Views

76% willing to recommend

ACCELQ Automate

OpenText UFT Developer

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between ACCELQ Automate and OpenText UFT Developer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Test Automation Tools Report (Updated: November 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Test Automation Tools

November 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,067 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

ACCELQ Automate

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

18th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText UFT Developer

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

10th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (14th)

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of ACCELQ Automate is 1.2%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.6%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

PrabhuKrishnamoorthy

Senior Director at Ascendion

Provides good stability and a valuable object identification feature

We evaluated data testing for millions of records. As per architecture, it can efficiently run a few thousands of records. However, we couldn't implement it for millions of records. Thus, it works well for a small amount of data. We have 30 users for it in our organization and use it daily. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

Read full review

Mohamed Bosri

Process Architect Referent at Forvia

Efficient recording feature shines amid expected desktop and website enhancements

Our use case involves functionality for a system ERP. We work with Deviation, which is stable and receives positive feedback from users OpenText UFT Developer allows junior testers to learn through open source and online resources like YouTube. They can find solutions to issues even if the…

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

"The platform contributes to faster test release cycles."

"Integrates well with other products."

"In UFT, it's a simple click to insert the checkpoints."

"OpenText UFT Developer works well with record technology, making it valuable for recording."

"The most valuable features are the object repository."

"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."

"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."

"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software."

"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

Cons

"The platform's reporting aspects can be broader and include more granular details."

"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."

"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 solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites."

"The pricing could be improved."

"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."

"There's room for improvement, especially when I compare OpenText to newer tools like NeoLoad."

"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."

"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."

More OpenText UFT Developer cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. It can be optimized."

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."

"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."

"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."

"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."

"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."

"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."

"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."

"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."

More OpenText UFT Developer pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Healthcare Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

21%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ACCELQ Automate?

The platform contributes to faster test release cycles.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ACCELQ Automate?

I rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. It can be optimized.

See all answers

What needs improvement with ACCELQ Automate?

The platform's reporting aspects can be broader and include more granular details. Additionally, there could be a capability to automatically generate automation scripts extracting the user data fr...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?

It's a high-priced solution compared to Selenium. Selenium is free, though there is a paid version now too. Selenium has improved a lot, and it's still okay to use. It's a functional testing tool, ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?

The solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites. It is also suggested that the design and some functionality could be better.

See all answers

Comparisons

Katalon Studio vs ACCELQ Automate

Compared 28% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs ACCELQ Automate

Compared 17% of the time

Testsigma vs ACCELQ Automate

Compared 16% of the time

Functionize vs ACCELQ Automate

Compared 11% of the time

Eggplant Test vs ACCELQ Automate

Compared 9% of the time

More ACCELQ Automate Competitors

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 58% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 23% of the time

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

Parasoft SOAtest vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText UFT Developer Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Test Automation Tools

November 2024

Download ACCELQ Automate product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer

December 2024

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

Also Known As

No data available

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

Learn More

ACCELQ

OpenText

Overview

The most powerful test automation tool for web, desktop, mainframes and more.

With OpenText UFT Developer, you get object identification tools, parallel testing, and record/replay capabilities.

Sample Customers

FISCHER, optanix, ERICSSON, BenifitMall, QuickPivot, DIGITALFUEL, westcreek

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines

Buyer's Guide

Test Automation Tools

November 2024

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: November 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Automation 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.