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
9th
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 (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of LambdaTest is 4.7%, up from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 7.1%, 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 Testing7.1%
LambdaTest4.7%
Other88.2%
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

"We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring."
"The primary feature that has significantly improved our test execution times is automation."
"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 solution is very easy to understand and has a user-friendly UI."
"It is a scalable solution."
"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."
"This product offers out-of-the-box geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"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."
"It is a stable solution."
"The solution's recording option is the most beneficial for test script creation and maintenance."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"It's simple to set up."
"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."
"Automation of tests is done very fast with UFT One."
 

Cons

"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."
"It would be nice to have an API for visual regression testing."
"We get logged out of the devices if there is some inactivity."
"I've also had some issues with the speed of certain API calls and the rendering of data. For example, when I'm onboarding data, the process can be slow."
"LambdaTest needs to have native application testing, which would be a great help to my team."
"The scalability is good with Amazon, but IBM had some issues."
"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."
"It would be much easier for us to read the test if they provided dashboard analytics."
"One area for improvement is its occasional slowness."
"I would like Micro Focus to provide more information on their portal about their newer products. The information about UFT One was outdated. The image recognition features could also be better."
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."
"There could be improvements in report export features similar to SmartBear."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"The speed could be improved because a large test suite takes some time to execute."
"The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"From the customer side, LambdaTest is cheaper for big company usage and works fine as other similar applications."
"It is 60% cheaper and there is no fuss in maintaining the lab, so we have more time to do the testing."
"The product can be described as an averagely-priced solution."
"LambdaTest's pricing is cheaper than that of other similar platforms."
"The pricing for LambdaTest is affordable, and one of the reasons we implemented it."
"LambdaTest is paid per execution."
"LambdaTest is priced well, which is why we migrated to it."
"LambdaTest is on the cloud, offers both free and paid plans which start at $19 USD per month."
"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."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"The pricing of the product is an issue."
"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
880,490 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Healthcare Company
7%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
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?
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?
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.
880,490 professionals have used our research since 2012.