IBM DevOps Test UI vs OpenText UFT Developer comparison

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. IBM is ranked #28, while OpenText is ranked #11 with an average rating of 7.8. IBM holds a 0.6% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText’s 2.8% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 76% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM DevOps Test UI

Read 8 IBM DevOps Test UI reviews

666 Views
384 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Developer

Read 37 OpenText UFT Developer reviews

1,926 Views
1,291 Comparison Views

76% 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: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM DevOps Test UI vs. OpenText UFT Developer

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 842,388 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

28th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (15th)

OpenText UFT Developer

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

11th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Test Automation Tools (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 0.6%, down from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.8%, 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."

"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."

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

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

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

"It is a product that can meet regulations of the banking industry."

"The solution is very scalable."

"The most valuable feature is stability."

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

"The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."

"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."

"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."

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

Cons

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

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

"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."

"Stability depends on the company's infrastructure and end-to-end infrastructure. When I used the tool in my project, we had a big problem with many users using it simultaneously."

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

"The support for .NET Framework and Visual Studio in Micro Focus UFT Developer is currently limited. At present, only Visual Studio 2019 is supported, despite the release of a newer version (2022). Similarly, the tool only supports up to .NET Framework version 4.3.8, while there have been six newer versions released. This is an area that could be improved upon, particularly in the Windows environment."

"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."

"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."

"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."

"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."

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

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."

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

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

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

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

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

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."

"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."

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

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

842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

27%

Financial Services Firm

16%

Real Estate/Law Firm

Government

Financial Services Firm

19%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Healthcare Company

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

HCL OneTest vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 23% of the time

OpenText UFT One vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 20% of the time

More IBM DevOps Test UI Competitors

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 60% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 20% of the time

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

Eggplant Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText UFT Developer Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

March 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

February 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: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

842,388 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.