Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Broadcom Service Virtualization vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Broadcom Service Virtualiza...
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Service Virtualization (2nd)
OpenText Functional Testing
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (6th), Test Automation Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Broadcom Service Virtualization is designed for Service Virtualization and holds a mindshare of 26.2%, down 36.8% compared to last year.
OpenText Functional Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 7.7% mindshare, down 9.9% since last year.
Service Virtualization Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Broadcom Service Virtualization26.2%
Parasoft Virtualize19.6%
ReadyAPI Virtualization16.9%
Other37.300000000000004%
Service Virtualization
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing7.7%
Tricentis Tosca15.7%
BrowserStack8.8%
Other67.8%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

DM
Senior Project Manager at Infosys
Can be used for the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance
We use it for the virtualization of third-party APIs for performance testing. Our second use case is related to the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance, which is used for insurance clients In the case of the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party…
Badari Mallireddy - PeerSpot reviewer
QA Automation Architect at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Automation becomes feasible with diverse application support and faster development
I have used UFT for web application automation, desktop application automation, and Oracle ERP automation UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use. It requires less coding, has built-in features for API testing, and most importantly, it supports more than just web…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Scalability has actually worked well and we are able to bring it to multiple environments."
"The most valuable features are the recording and creating of virtual services."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"The innovation is amazing. CA has continued to add to services that it supports, the transports that it supports, and has built all of the enterprise capabilities into the product as well."
"We are able to quickly scale our requests. We have tested across thousands of requests. We have had no problems so far."
"The most valuable feature is that it supports so many protocols. We, being a large bank, have almost all the protocols, and it supports all of them, so that's one good thing."
"In the case of the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance, there was a device terminal, which was interacting with the application via the TCP/IP protocol. Most of the tools don't support that, but we were able to achieve it using Broadcom Service Virtualization."
"Easy to understand ways of creating stubs."
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."
"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."
"The solution is easy to integrate with other platforms."
"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."
"On a scale of one to ten, I would give OpenText UFT One a 10 because it is a reliable product, it works, it's as good or better than similar solutions especially because you get technical support from real people. Additionally, upgrades are always provided on a consistent basis."
"The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."
"It offers a wide range of testing."
 

Cons

"​From a reporting perspective I think we would like to have a more user-friendly approach."
"CA actually releases a new version every year. We had issues with the upgrade prior to the latest one."
"UI should be more user friendly: better usability, more testing oriented."
"It is not a stable solution."
"One major feature I would like to see is on the user administration part. Right now, anybody can access any of the folders and any of the projects."
"The workstation component has a very out-dated UI and is in dire need of a facelift."
"Needs some additional lightweight, portable elements."
"DevTest is pretty massive. It's hard to tell what different parts of it can be used to do different things. They should modulize it more."
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"Additionally, there are hanging issues where it becomes unresponsive, which can be improved."
"The solution does not have proper scripting."
"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."
"The solution needs better marketing, training, promotion, and visibility because it is not visible."
"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"There are additional fees for advanced-level technical support."
"There is a yearly licensing cost, and I would give it a four out of five."
"I don't have the exact dollar amount, but we have spent close to $1,000,000 for a three-year agreement, for an enterprise level."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"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."
"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
24%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Performing Arts
9%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise98
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise71
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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?
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates...
 

Also Known As

ITKO LISA, CA LISA, CA Service Virtualization
Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Union Bank, Swisscom, Autotrader, KPN, ING Bank, Best Buy, American Family Insurance, TESCO, Telefonica, Molina Healthcare, California DMV, Aktia, City Index, Con-way, DirecTV, GRU Airport, Liquidnet, NAB, Nordstrom, T-Mobile, TIM Brasil, 
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Broadcom, OpenText and others in Service Virtualization. Updated: November 2025.
879,310 professionals have used our research since 2012.