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 Mar 1, 2026

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
6th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Functional Testing
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 4.3%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 6.2%, down from 10.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing6.2%
LambdaTest4.3%
Other89.5%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

KK
Practice Specialist at a government with 1-10 employees
Cloud-based testing has simplified remote mobile validation and provides flexible device coverage
I was not impressed with how detailed their analytics and logs are from LambdaTest. The solution we were testing is being used because many of us are working from home. It was easy to implement because with a real phone, we have to bring a real phone to each person. Since three years ago, many employees have been working from home, so we were trying to find a solution for this challenge. We had no need to exploit the information for the analytics generated in the background. The purpose was simply to make it easy for our employees to access a phone. The downsides I noticed include that the pricing was very good, but the visual quality of the image sometimes suffers. The contrast on a real iPhone provides better contrast than with the cloud solution. The only aspect that was less favorable than on a real phone was the contrast of the color.
Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Has supported faster test execution and increased flexibility while offering room to improve support responsiveness
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates another day of delay to get to the level that's needed. This is a common practice across most companies where you call, you get the entry-level person, and then they work their way up to help screen calls so that they are more focused.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"HyperExecute adds significant speed to execution, enhancing the overall testing process."
"The most valuable feature is the real-time testing, which helps you to test your website on more than two thousand combinations of browsers and operating systems."
"The Docker tunnel integration for local testing can be extremely useful to run on multiple instances in parallel."
"LambdaTest is easy to use, and the documentation provides all the needed information."
"Automation and mobile testing have improved our efficiency."
"Our test execution time was reduced to 16 mins from five hours when executed in parallel on multiple VMs. This has been extremely helpful!"
"I was really surprised by LambdaTest; it was a very good service and for the price, I think it is a very good solution."
"This product offers out-of-the-box geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
"The solution has good out-of-the-box protocols."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT One is you are able to use it with many other technologies. I have not had an instance where the solution was not able to automate or execute automation. I was able to use COBOL to manage some automation."
"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."
"UFT has improved our ability to regression test."
"It's simple to set up."
 

Cons

"It would be nice to have an API for visual regression testing."
"The downsides I noticed include that the pricing was very good, but the visual quality of the image sometimes suffers."
"Responsive testing UI is a bit cluttered, whereas the LT browser is much better to use."
"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."
"Their smart testing module needs improvement."
"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."
"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."
"Technical support could be improved."
"The solution is expensive."
"The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails."
"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."
"They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost."
"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing for LambdaTest is affordable, and one of the reasons we implemented it."
"This is an affordable product."
"The pricing could be made cheaper."
"It is 60% cheaper and there is no fuss in maintaining the lab, so we have more time to do the testing."
"It is free to start, which means you can actually see how it works and then take the decision to buy."
"LambdaTest is priced well, which is why we migrated to it."
"The tool is not cheap, but it is not expensive."
"From the customer side, LambdaTest is cheaper for big company usage and works fine as other similar applications."
"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"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."
"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
"The pricing of the product is 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.""
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,328 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
8%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise71
 

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?
I was not impressed with how detailed their analytics and logs are from LambdaTest. The solution we were testing is being used because many of us are working from home. It was easy to implement bec...
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 needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT One?
I'm more familiar with Functional Testing. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is a different product set that functions as an IDE for writing custom code. We don't leverage that product bec...
 

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: March 2026.
884,328 professionals have used our research since 2012.