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

"CA Service Virtualization has helped us advance the development cycle when third-party interfaces are not available to us."
"It is easy to use, has a faster time to market, and provides flexibility."
"There are several areas that are easily configurable."
"It's got probably the greatest amount of features, in terms of different technologies that you can automate and virtualize, out of any of the solutions out there."
"Easy to understand ways of creating stubs."
"We had a number of back-end services that were not available during testing times. What this had allowed us to do is get our early life testing done while those services are not available."
"We are able to quickly scale our requests. We have tested across thousands of requests. We have had no problems so far."
"Helps us to remove barriers that we have with dependencies on services that we don't own, or services that don't even exist yet."
"OpenText Functional Testing has an impressive ability to connect to mobile devices and its ability to test so many different types of software, whether it be mainframe, APIs, mobile, web, or desktop."
"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."
"UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use."
"It is a stable solution."
"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."
"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."
"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."
"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."
 

Cons

"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."
"​From a reporting perspective I think we would like to have a more user-friendly approach."
"I would rate the tech support a nine out of ten. They need more knowledge about the connectivity to DevOps orchestration."
"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."
"CA actually releases a new version every year. We had issues with the upgrade prior to the latest one."
"It is not a stable solution."
"The workstation component has a very out-dated UI and is in dire need of a facelift."
"They can always work on usability and making simple things simple to do. This is true of every product that deals with complexity."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"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."
"The user interface could be improved"
"Additionally, there are hanging issues where it becomes unresponsive, which can be improved."
"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."
"I am not sure if they have a vision of how they want to position the leads in the market, because if you look at Tosca, Tosca is one of the automation tools that have a strategy, and it recently updated its strategy with SAP. They are positioning them as a type of continuous testing automation tool. And if you notice Worksoft, particularly the one tool for your enterprise application, your Worksoft is positioning. I am not sure if Micro Focus UFT has a solid strategy in place. They must differentiate themselves so that people recognize Micro Focus UFT for that reason."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
 

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."
"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."
"There are additional fees for advanced-level technical support."
"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"The price is reasonable."
"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."
"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
"It's an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Service Virtualization solutions are best for your needs.
884,076 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.
884,076 professionals have used our research since 2012.