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

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud vs OpenText UFT One comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Customer Service

No sentiment score available
No sentiment score available
OpenText customer service is praised for responsiveness, though experiences vary, with mixed satisfaction levels and reliance on partners for support.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
 

Room For Improvement

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
5.5
OpenText UFT One needs better object identification, browser compatibility, AI, integration, and interface, with concerns on cost and stability.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
 

Scalability Issues

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
7.1
OpenText UFT One offers scalability and flexibility, though users note speed and browser issues; licensing affects usage costs.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
 

Setup Cost

No sentiment score available
No sentiment score available
OpenText UFT One is praised for robust automation but criticized for high costs and complex licensing options.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
 

Stability Issues

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
8.1
OpenText UFT One's stability is generally reliable but varies with system requirements and can be affected by version changes.
 

Valuable Features

No sentiment score available
Sentiment score
8.5
OpenText UFT One excels in cross-platform compatibility, versatile scripting, and efficient automation for desktop, web, and mobile testing.
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText LoadRunner Cloud
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (6th), Load Testing Tools (6th)
OpenText UFT One
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th), Test Automation Tools (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is designed for Performance Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 8.4%, down 9.8% compared to last year.
OpenText UFT One, on the other hand, focuses on Functional Testing Tools, holds 9.5% mindshare, down 9.8% since last year.
Performance Testing Tools
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

AlexLogan - PeerSpot reviewer
Has realistic scenario composition for performance tests and is highly scalable, but the user interface needs improvement
The solution generates traffic on the infrastructure, which resembles end users. Depending on the performance of the underlying infrastructure and nodes of the architecture, our company team can report on the scalability of applications. The solution performs two types of tests: user interface testing, which is implemented primarily in our organization for online banking, and the other one is API level testing for mobile banking. In terms of the feature set, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud is a market-leading application that has been around for 20 years. I have been working with the solution throughout the acquisition stages; the product used to be much better when it was primarily managed by Mercury. There are limited AI capabilities in the solution; when I was personally operating some smart scenarios using the feature of auto-scaling, I found it unsatisfying. I would recommend the product to others based on its feature set and the level of support. I would rate OpenText LoadRunner Cloud as seven out of ten. There are no glaring weaknesses in the product, and it's good enough for its core purpose.
Don Ingerson - PeerSpot reviewer
With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results
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. For Web browsers, UFT 12.54 supports IE9, IE10, IE11, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome (versions 31.0 to 54.9), Firefox (versions 27.0 to 49.0). Besides GUI testing, UFT supports database testing and API testing (Docker, WSDL, and SOAP). For the first time ever, HP started to expand the testing capabilities of UFT (QTP) beyond Windows beginning with UFT 12.00. A UFT user can now run tests on Web applications on a Safari browser that is running on a remote Mac computer.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Performance Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Do you recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
I absolutely recommend Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud. In fact, I consider it to be one of the best performance testing tools. I like it because it provides many benefits. Some of the ones I find to...
What do you like most about Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
One of LoadRunner's standout features is its extensive support for various TechStacks and protocols.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud?
The pricing is high compared to other licensing tools like NeoLoad. It's not excessively expensive but higher than NeoLoad. However, in my experience, clients often weigh NeoLoad and LoadRunner equ...
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?
The solution should have additional features, but not much. It already has some sort of artificial intelligence that must be developed. It needs to be in trend. The solution needs better marketing,...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, StormRunner Load, LoadRunner Cloud, and Micro Focus StormRunner Load
Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alfa Bank, N Brown Group, University of Copenhagen, McGraw-Hill, Cognizant
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, Tricentis, OpenText and others in Performance Testing Tools. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.