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

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One comparison

OpenText UFT Developer and OpenText UFT One are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText UFT Developer is ranked #15 with an average rating of 8.3, while OpenText UFT One is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.3. OpenText UFT Developer holds a 2.9% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText UFT One’s 9.5% mindshare. Additionally, 76% of OpenText UFT Developer users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OpenText UFT One users who would recommend it.
OpenText UFT Developer
Read 37 OpenText UFT Developer reviews
  • 2,342 Views
  • 1,512 Comparison Views
76% willing to recommend
OpenText UFT One
Read 93 OpenText UFT One reviews
  • 8,465 Views
  • 5,308 Comparison Views
88% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

OpenText UFT One and OpenText UFT Developer compete in the software testing category. OpenText UFT Developer seems to have the upper hand with its advanced functionality and flexible scripting, while OpenText UFT One receives recognition for pricing and support.

Features: Users highlight OpenText UFT One for its robust testing options, comprehensive automation capabilities, and strong integrations. OpenText UFT Developer is valued for agile testing support, flexible scripting, and seamless integration into modern pipelines.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT One users suggest improving execution speed, enhancing intuitive configuration processes, and optimizing resource consumption. OpenText UFT Developer users indicate a need for better documentation, enhanced real-device testing options, and increased support for older platforms.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText UFT One has smoother deployment cycles and responsive customer support, providing faster setup and troubleshooting. OpenText UFT Developer, while noted for its lightweight deployment model, has mixed reviews regarding customer service responsiveness.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One is seen as cost-effective with strong ROI, offering lower upfront setup costs. UFT Developer provides a higher long-term ROI due to its superior feature set, though initial costs are higher, making it worth the investment for advanced testing capabilities.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One Report (Updated: November 2024).
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One
November 2024
Download the complete report
Helped 816,406 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

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.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT Developer report
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
 

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.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT Developer report
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
 

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.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT Developer report
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
 

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.
 

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.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT Developer report
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
 

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.
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT Developer report
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT Developer
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
15th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
14th
Average Rating
7.4
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText UFT One
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.9%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 9.5%, down from 9.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Q&A Highlights

SP
Dec 01, 2021
Which product supports Cross Browser Testing: UFT Developer or UFT One?
UFT One is the one you need.
See all answers
 

Featured Reviews

Mohamed Bosri - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient recording feature shines amid expected desktop and website enhancements
Our use case involves functionality for a system ERP. We work with Deviation, which is stable and receives positive feedback from users OpenText UFT Developer allows junior testers to learn through open source and online resources like YouTube. They can find solutions to issues even if the…
Read full review
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.
Read full review
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

SP
Dec 1, 2021
Dec 1, 2021
Which product supports Cross Browser Testing: UFT Developer or UFT One?
Hi Subhash. Both tools can: UFT One - allows you to automate functional and regression testing for the widest range of applications and technologies can supports testing GUI, web, mobile or API applications. UFT Developer - is powerful and lightweight functional automation software for Agile and DevOps teams, built specifically for continuous testing and continuous integration. It allows you ...
See 2 answers
SD
Jan 11, 2021
Hi Subhash. Both tools can: UFT One - allows you to automate functional and regression testing for the widest range of applications and technologies can supports testing GUI, web, mobile or API applications. UFT Developer - is powerful and lightweight functional automation software for Agile and DevOps teams, built specifically for continuous testing and continuous integration.  It allows you to create tests in your favourite IDEs and to write robust and reusable test automation scripts using JavaScript, Java or C#. Get fast feedback from your test execution with the lightweight but detailed results report. UFT One includes a licence to UFT Developer. If you don't need the additional support in UFT One, the UFT Developer is the tool you need.
Read full answer
DC
Dec 1, 2021
UFT One is the one you need.
Read full answer
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
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

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Developer?
There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
It's a high-priced solution compared to Selenium. Selenium is free, though there is a paid version now too. Selenium has improved a lot, and it's still okay to use. It's a functional testing tool, ...
See all answers
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?
There's room for improvement, especially when I compare OpenText to newer tools like NeoLoad. NeoLoad is a strong competitor to LoadRunner and it's very fast. It saves a lot of time when creating s...
See all answers
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...
See all answers
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.
See all answers
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,...
See all answers
 

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer
Compared 25% of the time
OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT Developer Logo
OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT Developer
Compared 5% of the time
UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT Developer Logo
UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT Developer
Compared 4% of the time
Eggplant Test vs OpenText UFT Developer Logo
Eggplant Test vs OpenText UFT Developer
Compared 3% of the time
Parasoft SOAtest vs OpenText UFT Developer Logo
Parasoft SOAtest vs OpenText UFT Developer
Compared 3% of the time
More OpenText UFT Developer Competitors
Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 31% of the time
Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One Logo
Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 10% of the time
UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One Logo
UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 8% of the time
SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One Logo
SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 6% of the time
Ranorex Studio vs OpenText UFT One Logo
Ranorex Studio vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 4% of the time
More OpenText UFT One Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT Developer
November 2024
OpenText UFT Developer reportDownload OpenText UFT Developer product report
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One
November 2024
OpenText UFT One reportDownload OpenText UFT One product report
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)
 

Learn More

OpenText
OpenText
 

Overview

With OpenText UFT Developer, you get object identification tools, parallel testing, and record/replay capabilities.
Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications. Read white paper
 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One
November 2024
Free Report: OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
DOWNLOAD NOW
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation Tools vendors, and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.