Inflectra Rapise vs OpenText UFT Developer comparison

Inflectra and OpenText are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. Inflectra is ranked #23 with an average rating of 4.0, while OpenText is ranked #13 with an average rating of 7.8. Inflectra holds a 0.1% mindshare in TAt, compared to OpenText’s 2.4% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of Inflectra users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 76% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Inflectra Rapise

Read 7 Inflectra Rapise reviews

163 Views
79 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Developer

Read 37 OpenText UFT Developer reviews

1,860 Views
1,266 Comparison Views

76% willing to recommend

Inflectra Rapise

OpenText UFT Developer

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Inflectra Rapise and OpenText UFT Developer are popular tools in the software testing market. OpenText UFT Developer has an upper hand due to its robust feature set, which outweighs the higher costs compared to Inflectra Rapise's pricing and support advantages.

Features: Inflectra Rapise offers flexibility in handling web, desktop, and mobile applications, supports custom frameworks, and includes record and playback functionality. It also provides cross-browser compatibility. OpenText UFT Developer integrates well with major CI/CD tools, supports various protocols like HTTP, SAP, and Oracle Forms, and offers advanced GUI and API testing capabilities. It simplifies developer involvement by allowing the use of familiar programming languages like C# and Java.

Room for Improvement: Inflectra Rapise could enhance its automation capabilities and integration with third-party applications, improve its interface to better handle complex test scenarios, and expand its reporting features. OpenText UFT Developer could work on simplifying its deployment process, enriching its documentation and resources for beginners, and reducing its resource consumption to improve efficiency.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Inflectra Rapise provides a straightforward deployment process with commendable customer service, making it easier for teams to adopt. OpenText UFT Developer involves a more complex deployment but compensates with comprehensive support options and a wide array of resources to facilitate implementation.

Pricing and ROI: Inflectra Rapise is noted for its cost-effectiveness, offering a lower setup cost that leads to a quicker ROI. OpenText UFT Developer, though more expensive, delivers significant value with its extensive feature set, justifying the higher initial investment over time and aligning with businesses needing those advanced capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText UFT Developer Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText UFT Developer

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 846,617 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

Inflectra Rapise

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

23rd

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Robotic Process Automation (RPA) (30th)

OpenText UFT Developer

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

13th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (13th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of Inflectra Rapise is 0.1%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.4%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

WIllWorley

Software Consultant at The New Humanitarian

The tool needs to improve in the areas of security, though it is a versatile product

Inflectra Rapise needs to expand its ability. I spoke with Inflectra's executive account rep on the need to expand the tool's ability. The problem with Inflectra Rapise is that a lot of companies are still using SAP GUI. Inflectra has no intention of building Rapise in a way that allows it to interact with SAP GUI. Inflectra Rapise has very limited value for the companies I work with because they they still use SAP GUI since their top priority is SAP testing, and they want to get into automation, for which they need a tool that cannot only used to automate processes, but can also do end-to-end testing where you are not only using SAP GUI, but you are using the interface with old legacy systems that are still in use or with today's more modern technologies. In the future, the tool needs to increase its versatility. If I am at a company that uses 23 different technologies, like .NET Visual Basic, Oracle, SQL, or whatever, Inflectra Rapise needs to be made as a product that is an out-of-the-box usable tool for any technology.

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

"We always use the product for end-to-end automation test cases."

"It's pretty straightforward to set up."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its versatility."

"The solution is very scalable."

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

"The most valuable features are the object repository."

"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."

"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."

"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."

"One of the important features, which speeds up the automation testing development with LeanFT, is its object repository functions. Object identification are the most time-consuming aspect of building automation tests. LeanFT gives that out of the box. It helps you identify the objects and after that, once you got the object in place, then it's just about building the test scripts. So it reduces your development time significantly."

"The most valuable feature for me is the number of protocols that can be tested. It not only tests Web, but also SAP, Siebel, .Net, and even pdf."

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

Cons

"It would be good if there could be more integration of Inflectra Rapise, since not all customers use the same tool for test management and automation integration."

"Inflectra Rapise needs to expand its ability."

"The maintenance is very difficult. We've only been using the platform for three months, so I'm not sure if that will continue, but right now it's an observation I've had."

"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."

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

"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."

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

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

"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise."

"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

"We pay no more than $50 annually for support of each one of the licenses."

"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where ten means very good pricing."

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

"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."

"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."

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

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

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

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

More OpenText UFT Developer 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

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

32%

Government

18%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

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

What do you like most about Inflectra Rapise?

The most valuable feature of the solution is its versatility.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Inflectra Rapise?

I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where ten means very good pricing.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Inflectra Rapise?

See all answers

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

No data available

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 60% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 20% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

Eggplant Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText UFT Developer Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra Rapise

April 2025

Download Inflectra Rapise product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer

March 2025

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

Also Known As

Rapise

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

Overview

Rapise is the most powerful and easy to use test automation tool on the market. It allows you to quickly and easily automate the testing of your web, mobile and desktop applications. Why spend hours manually regression testing your applications when you can have Rapise do it for you?

Inflectra

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

OpenText

Sample Customers

- Soflab - RegEd - Intel - US Government

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

Buyer's Guide

Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText UFT Developer

February 2025

Free Report: Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText UFT Developer

Find out what your peers are saying about Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText UFT Developer and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Inflectra Rapise vs. OpenText UFT Developer report.

See our list of best Test Automation 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.