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 (1st)
OpenText Functional Testing
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (4th), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (5th)
 

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 28.6%, down 36.7% compared to last year.
OpenText Functional Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 6.2% mindshare, down 10.2% since last year.
Service Virtualization Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Broadcom Service Virtualization28.6%
Parasoft Virtualize26.2%
OpenText Service Virtualization14.8%
Other30.400000000000006%
Service Virtualization
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing6.2%
Tricentis Tosca12.0%
BrowserStack6.8%
Other75.0%
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…
Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Has supported faster test execution and increased flexibility while offering room to improve support responsiveness
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 another day of delay to get to the level that's needed. This is a common practice across most companies where you call, you get the entry-level person, and then they work their way up to help screen calls so that they are more focused.

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."
"We are able to quickly scale our requests. We have tested across thousands of requests. We have had no problems so far."
"It is definitely scalable."
"The most valuable features include the capability to use other program languages such as PLSQR, JAVA, .NET."
"The ability to create virtual services and deploy them as Docker containers, and include them in our Jenkins build pipelines, is a valuable feature."
"CA Service Virtualization has helped us advance the development cycle when third-party interfaces are not available to us."
"You can create virtual services from a live recording or convert raw traffic into request/response pairs."
"The ability to do parallel development and testing reduces our costs for duplicating environments, improving the productivity of our developers, and bringing products faster to market."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"The most valuable feature for me is that it works on multiple platforms and technologies."
"The stop automation is a great feature."
 

Cons

"​From a reporting perspective I think we would like to have a more user-friendly approach."
"More examples of portal-based virtualization."
"The cost is an area that needs improvement. There are a couple of other tools which provide support for performance testing with the base version itself, but Broadcom needs a separate component to support virtualization for performance testing. This is a costly component."
"UI should be more user friendly: better usability, more testing oriented."
"It is not a stable solution."
"I'd like to see more of the newer technologies included in there, looking mainly from a mobile perspective, possibly, so you can virtualize some of the aspects that we're going to be doing for mobile testing."
"I would like to have more flexibility towards the mainframe virtualization and also in JDBC virtualization."
"I really want to see more of the "express" kind of model, where you get a little bit for free. I'd love to be able to see you be able to edit and author tests without having to be connected to a licensed server. And then, if you want to go and execute tests, then you go and connect to the server... I think it would unblock people to be able to do a lot more work from home or from remote places, where they can't really connect to the server."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
"The solution does not have proper scripting."
"Previously, the product was a script-based solution. Presently, the tool offers non-script, no-code, or low-code functionalities, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"There are additional fees for advanced-level technical support."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"There is a yearly licensing cost, and I would give it a four out of five."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"For the price of five automation licenses, you simply would not be able to hire five manual testers for two years worth of 24/7 manual testing work on demand."
"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
"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."
"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."
"The price is one aspect that could be improved."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
883,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Marketing Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Performing Arts
8%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
8%
Retailer
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 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...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT One?
I'm more familiar with Functional Testing. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is a different product set that functions as an IDE for writing custom code. We don't leverage that product bec...
 

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 Broadcom, Tricentis, Parasoft and others in Service Virtualization. Updated: February 2026.
883,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.