No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs Perfecto comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 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

OpenText Functional Testing...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
6th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
7th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Perfecto
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
20th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
21st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (13th), Mobile App Testing Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is 3.5%, up from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Perfecto is 2.5%, down from 4.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers3.5%
Perfecto2.5%
Other94.0%
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Eitan Gold - PeerSpot reviewer
SQA Manager at Elmo Motion Control Ltd.
User-friendly integration with support for Visual Studio enhances GUI testing capabilities
OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio. The support is excellent. It is easy to implement tests with OpenText UFT Developer. We primarily use it for GUI testing and testing web applications with another application. This is the main usage for us. We also integrate it with the N-unit Framework, and they work well together.
Bharat Malik - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Automation Engineer at RBC
Keeps video records of tests, supports and provides virtual devices, and the technical support is good
The most valuable feature is the ability to record the video of every test case that we run during the automation. This means that we can go back at any time and actually see the video where the test passes or fails. We use Perfecto's cloud-based lab for testing across multiple OS versions. The online banking team uses it to test different Chrome versions on different OS versions, which is something that really helps. It holds all of the emulators and simulators, so it's very important because we depend on those tools for our testing. Perfecto provides same-day access when new devices are released, which is important because we sometimes make requests for these. For example, when a new iPhone is launched, it is quite important to test. This is true for all of the latest devices. Using the device lab has definitely helped us to scale our testing operations. At this point, we run tests across 300 devices and this is possible because our test execution time has decreased significantly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the important features, which speeds up the automation testing development with LeanFT, is its object repository functions. Object identification are the most time-consuming aspect of building automation tests. LeanFT gives that out of the box. It helps you identify the objects and after that, once you got the object in place, then it's just about building the test scripts. So it reduces your development time significantly."
"In our case, because we’re in the insurance industry, we have technologies from 20 years old to brand new, and that’s one reason that LeanFT is so great -- because it can support all those technologies, even the older ones."
"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
"Within a week, two of my global customers were able to leverage their automation through this solution, and the adaptability of how this slotted in was just amazing, which was incredibly efficient."
"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"LeanFT's been very good."
"The most valuable features are the object repository."
"Overall, it's a great solution."
"The quality of our software has improved since we implemented this solution."
"Customer Service: It's been 100%. Technical Support: It's been 100%."
"The most valuable feature is automated testing."
"Mobile testing is the most valuable feature as it has reduced dependency on physical devices. We are located offshore and we don't have the physical devices, and shipping physical devices after every new release would be a difficult task. But with Perfecto, it is easy."
"In terms of cross-platform testing, they offer all of it, every device available in the market. It covers real scenarios that mimic production so that we don't miss out on any devices that our clients might be using to run the applications we develop. It's been great and very helpful."
"Being able to run automated tests and see the success and failure rate of those runs every day has saved us a lot of time and helped us identify issues much sooner, which has improved the quality of our software."
"We're working in Agile and we need results ASAP. The fact that the lab provides same-day access to new devices is extremely important to us."
 

Cons

"Since it was a slightly different way of doing things, it was a little complex."
"I would rate technical support a one out of five."
"I'd like to not have to use Selenium. I'd like to be able to do headless scripting and not just always be UI serving."
"The tool is not the problem. The problem is that we can't get the tool working, because there are other issues."
"I would give six for scalability because TestComplete is lightweight, but unlike that, OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is heavyweight and consumes almost half of the system memory whenever it is up and running, frequently making the system hang."
"As the releases come, support for all technologies in the systems under test that UFT currently support will be the obvious place for improvement."
"Ultimately, due to the scripting, integration, and other functionality that is missing, we may switch to another solution in the future."
"I think the one thing we're basically asking for should be JavaScript support, but I think they will start adding JavaScript support in the future."
"There was a discussion about having the capability to export the test results to a certain tool that we use in our project. If that were added it would be great not having to manually take screenshots, put them in a document, and share them on the different test management tools."
"We feel that Perfecto is a little slow. If they could improve on that slowness in accessing the app, when we want to click a button, that would be great because we feel the difference. An improvement in the connectivity speed is required."
"It would be ideal if there was a complete integration with other test management tools and other applications like HPLM, Micro Focus, or Microsoft Azure."
"The monitoring features, in particular network traffic monitoring, could be improved."
"I'm hoping they can support on-premises instances."
"I'm hoping they can support on-premises instances. We have been working on a JIRA integration with Perfecto—and I'm extremely impressed that they have that—but at this time they're not supporting onsite JIRA instances, which is what we have."
"I would like to see the inclusion of machine learning features. If we can have that, it will be a better tool."
"It is slow compared to physical device testing. The interactive speed could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."
"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
"Pricing-wise, it is fine. It is not as expensive as what we used to have in the past from HP, IBM, and others. It is decently priced."
"Perfecto has definitely saved us on the costs and efforts of having to maintain our own virtual test environment. We lost about 20 devices in the past to maintenance and audit. That was a massive loss for us, as a company, because we were giving devices to someone, but don't know whether we would get it back or not. Having those virtual labs, we don't need to worry about these kinds of things. We are easily saving $5,000 to $10,000 a month on device costing."
"It's definitely on the higher end of prices for this type of service."
"Although Perfecto is a good product for us to use, it is a bit expensive. It takes management a bit of work to find the appropriate funding for us to keep Perfecto. I imagine there could be some way to make it more accessible."
"This is an expensive solution compared to others, by 30% to 40%."
"Pricing is an area where Perfecto can do a little better. When we obtain additional licenses, we enter into negotiations with them."
"Perfecto is about 30-40% cheaper than Device Anywhere. That was a big reason why we switched. Perfecto also solves some of the issues that we had with Device Anywhere. We have grown by 100% since we started to use Perfecto, and now we have devices roaming. When we look at the competition, we would still stick with Perfecto."
"Perfecto's price is excellent compared to other products with similar features. It was the lowest of the three we evaluated. We also established a partnership with Perfecto, so they provide discounts when we sell Perfecto projects and licenses to our customers."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
910,564 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Construction Company
12%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise30
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise23
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Developer?
As of now, we don't have integration in the CI/CD pipeline, but they are supporting that as well. When your machine is in a locked state, you can even execute the Windows application automation. Mi...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Developer?
For functional testing, we are using OpenText Functional Testing for Developers as our product for testing. I am using the cross-browser testing capabilities of OpenText Functional Testing for Deve...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
Perfecto Mobile, Perfecto Web
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
Virgin Media, Paychex, Rabobank, R+V, Discover
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs. Perfecto and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
910,564 professionals have used our research since 2012.