OpenText UFT Developer vs Testim comparison

Read 10 Testim reviews

1,629 Views
1,150 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Developer

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT Developer and Testim are competitors in software testing automation. OpenText UFT Developer seems to have an advantage in integration capabilities, appealing to those needing testing across multiple platforms, while Testim's AI-driven approach offers faster test creation and execution.

Features: OpenText UFT Developer offers comprehensive cross-platform testing, extensive integration capabilities, and the ability to customize integrations with enterprise applications. Testim features AI-based self-healing tests, easy test maintenance, and an efficient recording feature that simplifies test automation.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT Developer could improve in terms of simplifying its deployment, enhancing user-friendliness for non-developers, and offering a more intuitive interface. Testim could enhance its integration with third-party tools, expand support for additional platforms, and improve customization options for complex testing scenarios.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Testim provides a cloud-based deployment model that simplifies setup and scalability, along with responsive customer support. OpenText UFT Developer offers complex deployment options suitable for enterprises needing on-premise solutions and supports an integrated enterprise experience with extensive resources.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT Developer requires a higher initial setup cost, which can lead to long-term ROI for large-scale enterprises due to its comprehensive features. Testim presents a more cost-effective setup with flexible pricing, offering quick time-to-value through AI efficiencies, attractive for companies seeking expedited returns and lower initial investments.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT Developer vs. Testim Report (Updated: February 2025).

OpenText UFT Developer vs. Testim

February 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

Testim

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

11th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

7th

Average Rating

9.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

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 Testim is 3.3%, up from 2.0% 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

PiyushSingh

Director at Xceedance

A stable tool to help users take care of the implementation phases in their environment

There are a few minor areas where improvements are required, but they are not something that I can discuss at a high level. I will have to ask the team that uses Testim since they can give a better response to what requires improvement in the product. I only manage the team that uses Testim. I cannot be exactly described as an end user of the tool. There were some issues in the product's initial setup phase in regard to the area of documentation since it wasn't very easy to understand everything mentioned in it. There were some trial and error methods our company had to deal with while using the product's documentation, after which we were able to get through the setup phase. I want the documentation to have more information to help users with the setup process. I want the product to be more scalable in the future.

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

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

"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."

"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."

"This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us."

"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."

"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."

"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."

"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."

More OpenText UFT Developer pros

"I have seen reduced maintenance due to smart locators, as it automatically finds locators for us even with minor application changes."

"The REST API features allowed integrated testing for select products to quickly make calls and test the UIs with API calls while the CLI allows us to matrix the grid function across browsers."

"The product is easy to use."

"The pre-defined tests are a great help, specifically the custom JS test that allows us to be able to use custom code to test complicated elements or scenarios."

"We added Testim to our CI flow. It allows us to test only tasks that already passed sanity tests."

"The automating smoke and regression tests have become easier and handier and manual efforts are saved."

"It is a highly stable solution."

"The feature I like most about Testim is the record and playback capability, which does not require writing a lot of code."

More Testim pros

Cons

"Stability depends on the company's infrastructure and end-to-end infrastructure. When I used the tool in my project, we had a big problem with many users using it simultaneously."

"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."

"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."

"UFT Developer is good, but it requires high-level development skills. Scripting is something that everybody should know to be able to work with this product. Currently, it is very development intensive, and you need to know various scripting languages. It would be good if the development effort could be cut short, and it can be scriptless like Tosca. It will help in more adoption because not every team has people with a software engineering background. If it is scriptless, the analysts who wear multiple hats and come from different backgrounds can also use it in a friendly manner. It is also quite expensive."

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

"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."

"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."

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

More OpenText UFT Developer cons

"The accessibility reporting features could be more robust to be reported at the script level and allow users to map down to the step level."

"The UI could use a better design with a better user experience in mind."

"Testim sometimes fails due to stability issues. It doesn't always work consistently, especially after running multiple tests."

"The API testing integration is a bit lacking and can be improved."

"There is currently no room for improvement that I can identify as of now."

"I get a little bit confused while creating new branches."

"The product's areas of improvement include pricing considerations and additional features related to visual testing and PDF handling."

"In the last couple of months, I have experienced some downtime where it wasn't working."

More Testim cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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."

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

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

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

"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."

"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."

More OpenText UFT Developer pricing and cost advice

"I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten compared to other tools."

"The solution is not expensive."

"The tool offers a fixed pricing model for our company."

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

18%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

Educational Organization

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?

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.

What do you like most about Testim?

The tool's most valuable feature is the recently added AI feature.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Testim?

I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten compared to other tools.

What needs improvement with Testim?

More advanced AI-based features and features on the API side would help us create better end-to-end test suites.

OpenText UFT One vs OpenText UFT Developer

Comparisons

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

Tricentis Tosca vs Testim

Compared 51% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Testim

Compared 21% of the time

Functionize vs Testim

Compared 11% of the time

Testsigma vs Testim

Compared 6% of the time

Applitools vs Testim

Compared 4% of the time

More Testim Competitors

Product Reports

Download OpenText UFT Developer product report

OpenText UFT Developer

March 2025

Download Testim product report

March 2025

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

Testim is an end-to-end agile testing automation solution which utilizes machine learning for test authoring, execution, and maintenance. Users can create tests in minutes, run thousands of tests in parallel across different browsers, integrate with their existing CI/CD and collaboration tools, and more.

Sample Customers

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

Microsoft, salesforce, JFrog, USA Today, Globality