OpenText UFT Developer vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

OpenText and Progress Software are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #13 with an average rating of 7.8, while Progress Software is ranked #24. OpenText holds a 2.6% mindshare in FT, compared to Progress Software’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 76% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Progress Software users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT Developer

Read 37 OpenText UFT Developer reviews

1,882 Views
1,294 Comparison Views

76% willing to recommend

Telerik Test Studio

Read 5 Telerik Test Studio reviews

1,024 Views
655 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Developer

Telerik Test Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT Developer and Telerik Test Studio are competing products in the realm of automated testing, each offering distinct advantages. While OpenText UFT Developer is praised for its comprehensive support for multiple programming languages, Telerik Test Studio leads in feature richness, making it a preferred choice despite higher costs.

Features: OpenText UFT Developer supports multiple programming languages, offers integration capabilities, and cross-platform testing features. Telerik Test Studio provides user-friendly scriptless automation, extensive reporting, and seamless CI/CD integration.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT Developer could enhance its ease of use for less technical teams, reduce initial complexity, and streamline integrations. Telerik Test Studio may improve customization options, offer more advanced scripting possibilities, and expand technical support resources.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText UFT Developer offers extensive deployment models with expert-level customer service fitting enterprise needs. Telerik Test Studio is characterized by a straightforward installation process and agile customer service for teams needing quick deployment.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT Developer requires a notable initial investment but is cost-effective for enterprises seeking long-term ROI through reduced maintenance costs. Telerik Test Studio has a higher upfront setup cost but offers quick ROI due to reduced development time and learning curve.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT Developer vs. Telerik Test Studio Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer vs. Telerik Test Studio

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 846,617 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:

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT Developer

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

13th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

13th

Average Rating

7.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Telerik Test Studio

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

24th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

25th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Load Testing Tools (22nd), Regression Testing Tools (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT Developer is 2.6%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 1.2%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Mohamed Bosri

Process Architect Referent at Forvia

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

Raghvendra Jyothi

Manager Project Management at Capgemini

Very good performance and load testing capabilities

There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Integrates well with other products."

"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."

"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."

"I like the tool because we can still access the devices' distance. It's not important where you're working. For example, I can use it in Brazil, Chile, and other parts where people are working. After the pandemic, many companies use it for homework. I think using it to administer and manage the devices is very good and effective."

"In UFT, it's a simple click to insert the checkpoints."

"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."

"The most valuable feature is stability."

"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

"The way it identifies elements is good."

"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."

"The performance and load testing are very good."

"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."

"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."

Cons

"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."

"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."

"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."

"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."

"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."

"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."

"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."

"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."

More OpenText UFT Developer cons

"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."

"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."

"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."

"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."

"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."

"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."

"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."

"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."

More OpenText UFT Developer pricing and cost advice

"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."

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

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

19%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

21%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Government

11%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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?

The solution could improve by working better with desktop applications and websites. It is also suggested that the design and some functionality could be better.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 60% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 20% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Silk Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

Eggplant Test vs OpenText UFT Developer

Compared 3% of the time

More OpenText UFT Developer Competitors

Selenium HQ vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 37% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 18% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 17% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 13% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 8% of the time

More Telerik Test Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer

March 2025

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

April 2025

Download Telerik Test Studio product report

Also Known As

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

No data available

Overview

With OpenText UFT Developer, you get object identification tools, parallel testing, and record/replay capabilities.

OpenText

Telerik Test Studio is an innovative and easy-to-use automated web, WPF and load testing solution. Test Studio tests support essential technologies like ASP.NET AJAX, Silverlight, PHP and MVC. Test Studio functional testing is a comprehensive yet cost-effective automated testing suite. Users can complete tasks quickly and easily with the product's point-and-click interface, which is augmented by Telerik-exclusive features like a visual storyboard and 3D element selection. Test Studio also offers script-less test automation for Silverlight applications. Test Studio load tests allow users to capture quickly capture, multiply and replay complex web traffic. Record HTTP traffic from desktop browsers, mobile devices and web services, and replay traffic with hundreds or thousands of virtual users spread across multiple machines. Fine-tune your load scenario with data binding, user authentication, and dynamic targets. Test Studio Mobile is an intuitive and easy to use test automation solution for Mobile application testing. Create tests once and test across multiple devices and OS's. The point and click functionality allows users to capture quickly and replay complex mobile testing functionality. There is no need to write a single line of code. Test against any number of real devices as you wish or through an emulator by connecting through Wifi. Test Studio for APIs helps customers verify the integrity and reliability of their APIs in an easy way and incorporate their API testing effort in their continuous testing and delivery process. Test Studio for APIs is used to determine whether APIs return the correct response for a broad range of commonly accepted requests, react properly to edge cases such as failures and unexpected inputs, as well as deliver the responses in an acceptable amount of time.

Progress Software

Sample Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines

Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Developer vs. Telerik Test Studio

March 2025

Free Report: OpenText UFT Developer vs. Telerik Test Studio

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT Developer vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. Telerik Test Studio 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.