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

OpenText UFT Developer vs Selenium HQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT Developer
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
15th
Average Rating
7.4
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (14th)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
108
Ranking in other categories
Regression 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 Selenium HQ is 4.6%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

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…
LokeshYadav - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation
I've also worked with Micro Focus. I'm working with Micro Focus, however, for that part, I'm working on the mainframe - although I've done some web testing using Micro Focus on a website. Otherwise, I found Selenium to be easier, and simpler to use than Micro Focus when it comes to the web. A lot of support online is available. A lot of forums, and communities are there. For Micro Focus, the part where you identify objects on a webpage, that part is pretty simple on Selenium. You can use XPath or CSS or IDE or anything, and it works fine. Yet with Micro Focus, the web part, I found it a little tedious to work with. Selenium is much easier in that sense on the web part.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature for me is the number of protocols that can be tested. It not only tests Web, but also SAP, Siebel, .Net, and even pdf."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks."
"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."
"Integrates well with other products."
"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."
"The solution is very scalable."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."
"Selenium HQ has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages."
"The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing."
"Ability to integrate with every other tool."
"The testing solution produces the best web applications."
"It is more stable in comparison to other solutions because they have quite some experience in the market."
"Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"Selenium is the fastest tool compared to other competitors. It can run on any language, like Java, Python, C++, and .NET. So we can test any application on Selenium, whether it's mobile or desktop."
"We can run multiple projects at the same time and we can design both types of framework, including data-driven or hybrid. We have got a lot of flexibility here."
 

Cons

"There's room for improvement, especially when I compare OpenText to newer tools like NeoLoad."
"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."
"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."
"The support for .NET Framework and Visual Studio in Micro Focus UFT Developer is currently limited. At present, only Visual Studio 2019 is supported, despite the release of a newer version (2022). Similarly, the tool only supports up to .NET Framework version 4.3.8, while there have been six newer versions released. This is an area that could be improved upon, particularly in the Windows environment."
"The pricing could be improved."
"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"There are stability issues with Internet Explorer only."
"One drawback to Selenium is that there is nothing like an object repository, such as that found in QTP, especially considering continuous integration practices that have become common nowadays."
"The initial setup of Selenium HQ is difficult in many areas, such as the framework."
"Could have additional readability and abstraction."
"Handling frames and windows needs to be improved."
"It would be better if we could use it without having the technical skills to run the scripting test."
"The solution's UI path needs to be modernized."
"An improvement to Selenium HQ would be the inclusion of a facility to work on Shadow DOM."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
"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."
"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
"When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
"Selenium is open-source, so there are no setup costs associated with it."
"There is no pricing cost. License is Apache License 2.0."
"It's open-source, so it's free."
"Selenium is an open-source product. It is free."
"Since it is an open source. It is free to use. However my company see it as the future of load testing."
"The pricing is open source."
"Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional 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
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
 

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.
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, ...
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...
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
As an open-source tool, Selenium does not have direct costs, but coding can be money-intensive because it is challenging.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
SeleniumHQ
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT Developer vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.