IBM DevOps Test UI vs OpenText UFT Developer comparison

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. IBM is ranked #29, while OpenText is ranked #13 with an average rating of 7.8. IBM holds a 0.6% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText’s 2.6% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 77% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM DevOps Test UI

Read 8 IBM DevOps Test UI reviews

638 Views
355 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Developer

Read 38 OpenText UFT Developer reviews

1,882 Views
1,294 Comparison Views

77% willing to recommend

IBM DevOps Test UI

OpenText UFT Developer

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

IBM DevOps Test UI and OpenText UFT Developer are competing in the automated testing solutions market. IBM DevOps Test UI has the upper hand in pricing and support, while OpenText UFT Developer outshines with its feature set, appealing to those prioritizing rich functionality.

Features: IBM DevOps Test UI is notable for integration capabilities, scalability, and continuous testing tools. OpenText UFT Developer excels with extensive cross-platform support, a comprehensive scripting environment, and AI-driven testing features.

Room for Improvement: IBM DevOps Test UI could benefit from enhanced AI testing capabilities, more diverse scripting environments, and improved cross-platform compatibility. OpenText UFT Developer might improve with more personalized customer support, simpler deployment for traditional DevOps settings, and reduced initial costs.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM DevOps Test UI offers flexible deployment that fits seamlessly into DevOps environments, backed by attentive service. OpenText UFT Developer provides solid deployment options with a less tailored support approach, focusing on comprehensive but sometimes generic assistance.

Pricing and ROI: IBM DevOps Test UI is known for lower setup costs, leading to faster ROI and clear support. OpenText UFT Developer's higher initial cost is offset by its extensive features and long-term benefits, attracting those ready to invest for advanced capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 847,862 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

IBM DevOps Test UI

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

29th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (14th)

OpenText UFT Developer

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

13th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Automation Tools (13th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 0.6%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.6%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Hellen Zhang

Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada

Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support

The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework. The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run. The reason is that changes were made to how it works with the browser and the startup takes some time. Adjusting those changes to speed up the load time will improve the solution.

Read full review

Mohamed Bosri

Process Architect Referent at Forvia

Efficient recording feature shines amid expected desktop and website enhancements

Our use case involves functionality for a system ERP. We work with Deviation, which is stable and receives positive feedback from users OpenText UFT Developer allows junior testers to learn through open source and online resources like YouTube. They can find solutions to issues even if the…

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 valuable feature is the UI component tester."

"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."

"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."

"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."

"There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership."

"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."

"In UFT, it's a simple click to insert the checkpoints."

"This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us."

"The solution is very scalable."

"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."

"OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio."

"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

Cons

"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."

"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."

"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."

"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."

"The solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites."

"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."

"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."

"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."

"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."

"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."

"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."

"UFT Developer is good, but it requires high-level development skills. Scripting is something that everybody should know to be able to work with this product. Currently, it is very development intensive, and you need to know various scripting languages. It would be good if the development effort could be cut short, and it can be scriptless like Tosca. It will help in more adoption because not every team has people with a software engineering background. If it is scriptless, the analysts who wear multiple hats and come from different backgrounds can also use it in a friendly manner. It is also quite expensive."

More OpenText UFT Developer cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."

"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."

"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."

"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."

"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."

"When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."

"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."

"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."

"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."

More OpenText UFT Developer pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

28%

Financial Services Firm

16%

Real Estate/Law Firm

Government

Financial Services Firm

19%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Developer?

There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?

It's a high-priced solution compared to Selenium. Selenium is free, though there is a paid version now too. Selenium has improved a lot, and it's still okay to use. It's a functional testing tool, ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?

The solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites. It is also suggested that the design and some functionality could be better.

See all answers

Comparisons

Selenium HQ vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 38% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 22% of the time

HCL OneTest vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 22% of the time

More IBM DevOps Test UI Competitors

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 58% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 19% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

Eggplant Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText UFT Developer Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download IBM DevOps Test UI product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer

March 2025

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

Also Known As

IBM Rational Functional Tester

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT

Overview

IBM DevOps Test UI, also known as Rational Functional Tester, is a software tool designed for automated functional and regression testing of Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) and data-driven testing. It automates the testing process to ensure application functionalities work as intended and identifies any issues caused by new code changes. The tool is tailored for GUI testing, allowing for easy recording and playback of test cases that interact with UI elements like buttons and menus. It supports data-driven testing, enabling comprehensive tests across various data sets. Additionally, it offers visual editing features with screenshot representations for easy test creation and ScriptAssure technology to maintain test scripts even if the UI changes.

IBM

With OpenText UFT Developer, you get object identification tools, parallel testing, and record/replay capabilities.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Edumate

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines

Buyer's Guide

IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer

April 2025

Free Report: IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer report.

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

We monitor all Functional 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.