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 Nov 27, 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
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 February 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 4.5%, up from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 6.4%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing6.4%
LambdaTest4.5%
Other89.1%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

MJ
Head of QA at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
Cross-platform testing and faster execution enhance testing efficiency
Don't worry about anything. Just go for it. There will not be an issue, as far as you know what you are buying and how you want to use it. Go for it, the platform is good. I rate the solution eight out of ten due to some areas needing improvement. I rate the overall solution eight out of ten.
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

"It's user-friendly and offers valuable features for testing, making it a reliable tool."
"It is a scalable solution."
"I was really surprised by LambdaTest; it was a very good service and for the price, I think it is a very good solution."
"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."
"Automation and mobile testing have improved our efficiency."
"The Docker tunnel integration for local testing can be extremely useful to run on multiple instances in parallel."
"We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring."
"Builds that took days to complete with in-house infrastructure were executed in a couple of hours."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"It's simple to set up."
"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"The solution's recording option is the most beneficial for test script creation and maintenance."
"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
 

Cons

"Their smart testing module needs improvement."
"I didn't like the solution's technical support and how they communicated and tried to fix the issues of customers like me."
"LambdaTest needs to have native application testing, which would be a great help to my team."
"The execution reporting can be improved for better integration between automation execution and accessibility platform reporting."
"The tool can improve its testing speed. Changing or switching to another mobile phone can be very slow on a real device."
"You cannot perform native-app testing, as they offer simulation for web testing only."
"LambdaTest needs to improve its speed and memory because it takes a long time to load."
"Sometimes, when multiple users use the tool simultaneously, it can slow down, affecting efficiency."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"One thing that confused me, and now just mildly irritates me, is that we migrated from QuickTest Pro to HP UFT, Unified Functional Test. After we did the migration, it turned out that we didn't really have Unified Functional Test at all."
"The initial setup is complex."
"There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT."
"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"The tool needs to improve its performance since it can become heavy."
"Additionally, there are hanging issues where it becomes unresponsive, which can be improved."
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is not cheap, but it is not expensive."
"LambdaTest is paid per execution."
"This is an affordable product."
"The pricing for LambdaTest is affordable, and one of the reasons we implemented it."
"I used the product for free."
"LambdaTest is on the cloud, offers both free and paid plans which start at $19 USD per month."
"LambdaTest's pricing is cheaper than that of other similar platforms."
"The pricing could be made cheaper."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
"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."
"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."
"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."
"Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
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 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?
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...
 

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: January 2026.
881,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.