Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs OpenText UFT One comparison

Digital.ai and OpenText are both solutions in the Mobile App Testing Tools category. Digital.ai is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.0, while OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1. Digital.ai holds a 1.1% mindshare in MTT, compared to OpenText’s 24.5% mindshare. Additionally, 66% of Digital.ai users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Read 3 Digital.ai Continuous Testing reviews

210 Views
145 Comparison Views

66% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

Read 95 OpenText UFT One reviews

3,717 Views
2,358 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Digital.ai Continuous Testing

OpenText UFT One

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT One and Digital.ai Continuous Testing compete in the test automation landscape. Digital.ai Continuous Testing emerges as the preferred choice due to its comprehensive feature set and operational efficiency.

Features: OpenText UFT One provides robust cross-platform testing capabilities, an extensive range of integrations with enterprise tools, and reliable automation processes. Digital.ai Continuous Testing offers advanced cloud testing options, significant scalability, and efficient automation, alongside broad test coverage and versatile test execution.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Digital.ai Continuous Testing is recognized for its seamless cloud-based deployment model, enabling quick setup, and its customer service is noted for being responsive and supportive. OpenText UFT One has a traditional on-premises deployment, which can result in longer setup times, although it maintains good customer service.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One demands a substantial initial investment but promises significant returns through reliable performance and robust testing functionalities. Digital.ai Continuous Testing may involve higher ongoing costs yet offers a high ROI through its extensive automation features and value-centric pricing, which often offsets initial expense considerations.

To learn more, read our detailed Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 845,406 peers since 2012

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

Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

9th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

20th

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (2nd)

OpenText UFT One

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (6th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Mobile App Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Continuous Testing is 1.1%, down from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 24.5%, down from 26.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Mobile App Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Alan Chiou

PM at Galaxy Software Services

Has Mobile Studio feature which can generate scripts

The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version.

Read full review

Don Ingerson

QA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results

With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files. For Web browsers, UFT 12.54 supports IE9, IE10, IE11, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome (versions 31.0 to 54.9), Firefox (versions 27.0 to 49.0). Besides GUI testing, UFT supports database testing and API testing (Docker, WSDL, and SOAP). For the first time ever, HP started to expand the testing capabilities of UFT (QTP) beyond Windows beginning with UFT 12.00. A UFT user can now run tests on Web applications on a Safari browser that is running on a remote Mac computer.

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 most useful feature for me is Mobile Studio. It has a UI where I can click on elements, and it generates a script for me. Mobile Studio can generate code from testing steps. I'm using Python with it."

"The most valuable part of Experitest is the number of real devices on which the test is run."

"Experitest is one of the only companies to offer a real device on the cloud to perform testing. They also provide quality documentations that help you navigate and maximize the solution."

"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."

"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."

"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."

"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."

"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."

"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."

"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."

"Has improved our organization by allowing us to obtain fast, detailed information about the behavior of our products and to supply this to the customer, enabling us to work together without the need for special programming knowledge."

More OpenText UFT One pros

Cons

"I would also like to see more videos and descriptions that could make installation more efficient."

"The integration process was good, but I've faced some challenges. Every time they release a new version, I find bugs in the UI and features. Sometimes, buttons don't work well. When this happens, I submit a ticket to technical support, but they often have to fix it in the next version."

"I have been automating tests for many years on many things but not on mobile devices. The amount of time that I have spent on just figuring out how to use Experitest and get it to work was quite long compared to what I have been doing before. I spent the first two weeks just getting it started. It would be good to have some video explanation of how to use it on your devices and get started. Their online documentation is quite good and extensive, but it would be quite good to have some end-to-end examples demonstrated."

"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."

"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function."

"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."

"The solution does not have proper scripting."

"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."

"UFT has a recording feature. They could make the recording feature window bigger for whatever activities that I am recording. It would improve the user experience if they could create a separate floating panel (or have it automatically show on the side) once the recording starts."

"We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."

"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."

More OpenText UFT One cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We make monthly payments. The cost is dependent on the number of devices we intend to support."

"It is quite fairly priced, but it really depends on your budget. It is somewhere in the mid-range of products. It is not free and it is not QGP that nearly costs a whole house. You pay for the number of users who require access to execute the tests."

"The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker."

"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."

"The tool's price is high."

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

"The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""

"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."

"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."

"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."

"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

24%

Computer Software Company

22%

Insurance Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?

The price is reasonable for our company, but I'm not the decision-maker.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Digital.ai Continuous Testing?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Digital.ai Continuous Testing?

I'm using Digital.ai Continuous Testing to create and test a mobile application. We're developing and testing a mobile app.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?

UFT still requires some coding. If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again. Additionally, customer support could be improved as they take days to ...

See all answers

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Compared 60% of the time

Perfecto vs Digital.ai Continuous Testing

Compared 40% of the time

More Digital.ai Continuous Testing Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 31% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 11% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 7% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ConformIQ Creator vs. Digital.ai Continuous Testing

March 2025

Download Digital.ai Continuous Testing product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

March 2025

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Also Known As

Experitest Seetest, Experitest

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro

Overview

Experitest's continuous testing solutions enable enterprises to reduce risk and provide their customers satisfying, error-free experiences across all devices and browsers. They seamlessly integrate with best-in-class tools throughout the DevOps pipeline allowing organizations to rapidly deliver highly protected, quality applications at-speed and at-scale.

Digital.ai

Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications.

Read white paper

OpenText

Sample Customers

Samsung, American Express, Barclays, China Mobile, Citi, Cisco, McAfee

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services

Buyer's Guide

Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One

February 2025

Free Report: Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One

Find out what your peers are saying about Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Digital.ai Continuous Testing vs. OpenText UFT One report.

See our list of best Mobile App Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation Tools vendors.

We monitor all Mobile App Testing 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.