OpenText UFT One vs SmartBear TestComplete comparison

OpenText and SmartBear are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.2, while SmartBear is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.8. OpenText holds a 10.3% mindshare in TAt, compared to SmartBear’s 6.1% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of SmartBear users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT One

Read 95 OpenText UFT One reviews

8,510 Views
5,319 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

SmartBear TestComplete

Read 75 SmartBear TestComplete reviews

4,852 Views
3,527 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

SmartBear TestComplete

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT One and SmartBear TestComplete are competitive products in the test automation market. OpenText UFT One appears to have a technical edge due to its feature-rich support for various technologies and robust integration capabilities, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is favored for its cost-effectiveness and easier entry for smaller-scale automation needs.

Features: OpenText UFT One is strong in diverse browser support, robust integration with Excel and ALM, and includes InsightObject methods and testing extensibility. SmartBear TestComplete provides ease of use with direct access to object properties, and comprehensive web, desktop, and mobile testing capabilities, although it may struggle with dynamic object recognition and performance in complex environments.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT One could enhance stability, reduce memory usage, and improve browser compatibility and integration with open-source tools while offering more competitive pricing. SmartBear TestComplete would benefit from improving intuitive object mapping, enhancing support for modern web frameworks, and expanding features for mobile testing. Both tools need UI and integration enhancements to alleviate user challenges.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText UFT One allows deployment in on-premises and private cloud environments, while SmartBear TestComplete's on-premises deployment suits users desiring straightforward licensing. OpenText UFT One's customer service can be excellent but variable due to reliance on external support. SmartBear TestComplete, meanwhile, enjoys solid partner support and rapid responses to enhance user satisfaction.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One is regarded as expensive with a complex licensing model, yet provides substantial ROI for large enterprises needing extensive automation. SmartBear TestComplete, being more economical, attracts organizations looking for cost-effective solutions through its flexible licensing. While OpenText UFT One requires a higher initial investment, its advanced features promise significant returns, as TestComplete offers savings and value through efficient usage and flexible licensing.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 832,138 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

OpenText UFT One

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th)

SmartBear TestComplete

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

7th

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

5th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

6th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 10.3%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SmartBear TestComplete is 6.1%, down from 7.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

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

Prakhar Goel

Sr Test Lead at Emerson

Used for integration automation, user-based automation, and web automation

The solution's most valuable features are the drag-and-drop feature, keyword-driven approach, and reusability of the scripts. The solution has introduced a new feature that helps us identify objects we cannot normally identify. It gives you a fair idea of objects, resolving the object recognition issue. The solution can be used to perform different tests on different machines.

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 best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."

"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."

"The solution's recording option is the most beneficial for test script creation and maintenance."

"The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests."

"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."

"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."

"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."

"UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use."

More OpenText UFT One pros

"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."

"Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."

"Customer service and technical support responsiveness are high. Everyone is very professional."

"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."

"The solution is mainly stable."

"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."

"TestComplete fits almost perfectly with a large amount of stacks, such as Delphi, C#, Java and web applications."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to integrate with Azure DevOps for continuous integration and deployment."

More SmartBear TestComplete pros

Cons

"The speed could be improved because a large test suite takes some time to execute."

"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."

"One area for improvement is its occasional slowness."

"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."

"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."

"You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out."

"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."

"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."

More OpenText UFT One cons

"Product is not stable enough and it crashes often."

"The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing."

"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."

"The way objects are added and used when utilizing descriptive programming could be improved. It is a little unwieldy, compared to UFT."

"We were testing handheld barcode scanners running WindowsCE with many menus of warehouse functions, and our biggest problem was the timing between input and responses."

"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."

"The integration tools could be better."

"TestComplete gives support to do requests to a SOAP web service but has no support to do HTTP requests on Restful services."

More SmartBear TestComplete cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing of the product is an issue."

"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."

"The price is one aspect that could be improved."

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

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."

"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.""

"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."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

"SmartBear TestComplete is an expensive tool."

"Overall, for us, the cost of the TestComplete platform and the three extra modules is around $8,000."

"My advice so far, is that while it’s not quite as powerful and easy to use as UFT, its price tag more than makes up for it."

"We have a TestComplete 12 license."

"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."

"The solution is around $1500. Some are perpetual licenses, and some get a yearly report card."

"The price is less, compared to other products, such as QTP."

"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."

More SmartBear TestComplete 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

832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Energy/Utilities Company

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

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

What do you like most about SmartBear TestComplete?

TestComplete has strong reporting capabilities. The reports they generate are really good.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SmartBear TestComplete?

I don't know much about the pricing, however, I think it's cheaper.

See all answers

What needs improvement with SmartBear TestComplete?

The recording function, when using Python, could be improved, as it does not work well in recording testing.

See all answers

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 31% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 11% of the time

UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 22% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 12% of the time

Qt Squish vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 10% of the time

Katalon Studio vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 9% of the time

Eggplant Test vs SmartBear TestComplete

Compared 6% of the time

More SmartBear TestComplete Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

January 2025

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Buyer's Guide

SmartBear TestComplete

January 2025

Download SmartBear TestComplete product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)

No data available

Overview

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

What is SmartBear TestComplete?

TestComplete is a reliable, sturdy automated testing platform created by SmartBear Software. SmartBear Software is a worldwide technological leader known for developing quality enterprise-class development and testing solutions.

TestComplete simplifies the process of creating tests for numerous applications, including, but not limited to; Desktop, Android, IOS, Web browsers, and Windows. Application tests can be manual, scripted, and even recorded by using keyword-driven or data-driven functionality. There are even additional options for error reporting and automated playback. The object repository is extremely accurate and is fully customizable. TestComplete can easily be used by experienced developers and even by manual novice testers to develop quality automated UI tests quickly.

TestComplete offers three different testing scenarios:

Desktop: Users can easily and quickly automate UI tests using today’s most popular desktop applications, such as; Windows, Java, Python,.Net, VBScript, and more.
Web: Users can effortlessly create renewable tests for all of today’s popular web applications, including JavaScript frameworks on 2000+ trusted browser and platform integrations.
Mobile: Users can safely build and automate serviceable UI tests on actual or virtual android or IOS devices, locally or in the cloud. Users can create code or codeless tests. TestComplete seamlessly integrates with many of today’s popular frameworks.

Key Features

Easily create automated UI tests: TestComplete offers scriptless Record and Replay or simple keyword-driven tests to quickly develop any type of UI test users may require. Tests can be recorded once, then replayed when needed across various applications on mobile, web, or desktop environments. TestComplete integrates with many different languages, such as Java, Python, C+, and more.
Keyword driven tests: Users can easily divide testing steps, actions, objects, and data with an integrated keyword-driven test structure. This makes it easy for every user to participate in the test automation process; there is no programming experience needed. Everything is made simple with easy-to-use point-and-click options.
Data driven tests: Easily distinguish data from test commands to keep administrative efforts simple. Users can improve overall coverage by running various automated mobile, desktop, or web UI tests.
Record and Replay: Users can reuse created automated tests across every environment as often as desired. This helps to expand overall test coverage and represents a huge cost and time savings.

Reviews from Real Users

Sandhiya T S., Sr Solutions Engineer at Lexington Soft, relates, “The record and replay aspects of the solution are quite useful for people. With them, you don't have to write any scripts. Basically, you can record your actions and play them back later. The initial setup is also very easy.”

Sai S R., Staff Test Architect at a tech services company, says, "The most valuable features of the SmartBear TestComplete are self-healing, they reduce the maintenance required. The different languages SmartBear TestComplete supports are good because some of our libraries are written in Python, JavaScript, and C#. It's very easy to put them all under one project and use them."

SmartBear

Sample Customers

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

Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit, and Thomson Reuters.

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete

January 2025

Free Report: OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT One vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors, best Functional Testing Tools vendors, and best Regression Testing 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.