Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

LambdaTest vs OpenText Functional Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

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

LambdaTest
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
97
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 5.6%, up from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 9.4%, down from 9.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Dinesh Saharan - PeerSpot reviewer
The tool reduces the manual effort needed and helps automate certain tasks for users
I won't be able to comment on what could be improved in the solution since I am not the one who handles LambdaTest. It is our company's IT team that takes care of LambdaTest. Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis. If something is perfect, it doesn't mean that it doesn't need to improvise or improve, like in terms of adding new features. There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time.
Badari Mallireddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation becomes feasible with diverse application support and faster development
I have used UFT for web application automation, desktop application automation, and Oracle ERP automation UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use. It requires less coding, has built-in features for API testing, and most importantly, it supports more than just web…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution is very easy to understand and has a user-friendly UI."
"LambdaTest offers geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"LambdaTest supports multiple platforms like iOS across different devices and enables real-time testing."
"This product offers out-of-the-box geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"It's user-friendly and offers valuable features for testing, making it a reliable tool."
"The support docs are precise and you can get started with them easily."
"Builds that took days to complete with in-house infrastructure were executed in a couple of hours."
"Without a doubt, LambdaTest is one of the big reasons behind our faster deployment and better team collaboration."
"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"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."
"UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use."
"The solution is easy to integrate with other platforms."
"The solution's recording option is the most beneficial for test script creation and maintenance."
"​Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests."
 

Cons

"Sometimes, when multiple users use the tool simultaneously, it can slow down, affecting efficiency."
"Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis...There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time."
"Responsive testing UI is a bit cluttered, whereas the LT browser is much better to use."
"It would be much easier for us to read the test if they provided dashboard analytics."
"LambdaTest needs to have native application testing, which would be a great help to my team."
"The analytics over the automation dashboard can be more intuitive."
"I think Lambdatest is a valuable tool for our team and things that have room for improvement would be mobile app testing, as it can be an important addition to the tool."
"The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting."
"I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps."
"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."
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."
"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"The solution does not have proper scripting."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"The solution needs better marketing, training, promotion, and visibility because it is not visible."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is 60% cheaper and there is no fuss in maintaining the lab, so we have more time to do the testing."
"This is an affordable product."
"LambdaTest is on the cloud, offers both free and paid plans which start at $19 USD per month."
"The pricing could be made cheaper."
"I used the product for free."
"LambdaTest is priced well, which is why we migrated to it."
"It is free to start, which means you can actually see how it works and then take the decision to buy."
"LambdaTest is paid per execution."
"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."
"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."
"The price is one aspect that could be improved."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"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 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 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 licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Educational Organization
11%
Retailer
7%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about LambdaTest?
We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LambdaTest?
The pricing of LambdaTest depends on the deal negotiated. It is cost-effective compared to competitors like BrowserStack ( /products/browserstack-reviews ) and Sauce Labs ( /products/sauce-labs-rev...
What needs improvement with LambdaTest?
The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting. There are specific use cases related to authentication and authoriz...
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...
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.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
OpenText UFT One required knowledge of VBScript, which is a limited version of Visual Basic. We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Bringmax, Totpal, Nethhouse, Integreplanner, Cognizant, Vendisol, Clearscale, Edureka
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about LambdaTest vs. OpenText Functional Testing and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.