OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs OpenText UFT One comparison

OpenText UFT Digital Lab and OpenText UFT One are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText UFT Digital Lab is ranked #18 with an average rating of 8.3, while OpenText UFT One is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1. OpenText UFT Digital Lab holds a 0.8% mindshare in FT, compared to OpenText UFT One’s 10.1% mindshare. Additionally, 82% of OpenText UFT Digital Lab users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OpenText UFT One users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Read 17 OpenText UFT Digital Lab reviews

598 Views
339 Comparison Views

82% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

Read 95 OpenText UFT One reviews

7,140 Views
4,477 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT Digital Lab

OpenText UFT One

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

OpenText UFT One and OpenText UFT Digital Lab compete in the test automation category, with UFT One focusing on desktop and web testing, while UFT Digital Lab specializes in mobile app testing. UFT Digital Lab seems to have the upper hand in mobile testing adaptability due to its advanced features justifying its cost.

Features: OpenText UFT One offers robust cross-browser compatibility, seamless integration capabilities for diverse environments, and powerful object recognition tools for desktop and web testing. UFT Digital Lab provides real device access, cloud-based testing labs, and enhanced mobile app testing features.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT One could improve by enhancing mobile testing features, increasing scalability for cloud integrations, and reducing setup complexities for non-desktop applications. UFT Digital Lab could benefit from reduced initial setup costs, improved cross-browser testing capabilities, and better integration with third-party testing tools.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText UFT One is known for its straightforward on-premises deployment with excellent customer support, ideal for enterprises. UFT Digital Lab offers cloud-centric deployment, which allows for easy scalability and competitive support, excelling in adapting cloud resources quickly compared to UFT One's traditional infrastructure needs.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One is attractive due to its competitive initial setup cost and favorable ROI from its broad testing abilities. UFT Digital Lab, while having a higher setup cost, justifies this with significant ROI from advanced mobile testing features, offering potential greater long-term returns.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. OpenText UFT One Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. OpenText UFT One

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 844,944 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 Digital Lab

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

18th

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

5th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText UFT One

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (6th), Test Automation Tools (2nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT Digital Lab is 0.8%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 10.1%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Robinson Caiado

Sales Leader at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Automates mobile solutions while boosting productivity and fostering innovation

It allows multiple devices to be used and gives flexibility in adding devices when a project is needed. Most of the time, I have several devices where it is predefined. We can use it, but sometimes, we must scale it in a particular situation. It's very flexible. It is very important because we can use a different approach to software testing, for example, to find a way to execute UFT software testing with only one execution. This reproduces all the platforms that we need.

Read full review

Don Ingerson

QA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

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

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The fact that it allows users to test on real mobile devices instead of emulators is something that projects have told us is beyond compare."

"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."

"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."

"The solution is easy to use. There are features to orchestrate mobile testing, including mobile testing automation. You can test different devices at the same time."

"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."

"The product is easy to use."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."

"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."

"It's simple to set up."

"Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."

"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."

"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."

"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."

"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."

"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT One is you are able to use it with many other technologies. I have not had an instance where the solution was not able to automate or execute automation. I was able to use COBOL to manage some automation."

More OpenText UFT One pros

Cons

"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."

"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."

"We need to scale devices easily. Some customers would like to loop in AWS or other cloud providers to check if their devices have the cloud factor. OpenText UFT Digital Lab needs to improve it."

"We like to host the tools centrally. We would need them to be multi-tenants, so different projects could log on and have their own set of devices and their own set of apps, and they wouldn't see data from other projects that are using it."

"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."

"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."

"For the most part, the key challenge is ensuring that customers fully utilize the product as intended and adopt the appropriate frameworks to implement the solutions effectively."

"The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile."

"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."

"Previously, the product was a script-based solution. Presently, the tool offers non-script, no-code, or low-code functionalities, making it an area where improvements are required."

"Technical support could be improved."

"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."

"I am not sure if they have a vision of how they want to position the leads in the market, because if you look at Tosca, Tosca is one of the automation tools that have a strategy, and it recently updated its strategy with SAP. They are positioning them as a type of continuous testing automation tool. And if you notice Worksoft, particularly the one tool for your enterprise application, your Worksoft is positioning. I am not sure if Micro Focus UFT has a solid strategy in place. They must differentiate themselves so that people recognize Micro Focus UFT for that reason."

"Customer service is a big drawback. From my personal experience, after creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody."

"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."

More OpenText UFT One cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"While the pricing may seem relatively high, when compared to competitors, it often falls in line or can even be more cost-effective."

"The product could be more affordable."

"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."

"For the price of five automation licenses, you simply would not be able to hire five manual testers for two years worth of 24/7 manual testing work on demand."

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."

"The price is reasonable."

"The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."

"The pricing of the product is an issue."

"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

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

844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

22%

Financial Services Firm

22%

Non Profit

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Mobile?

For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?

Sometimes, it's challenging to have relations with OpenText support.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?

We use it in financial services companies to automate mobile solutions and applications.

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?

UFT still requires some coding. If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again. Additionally, customer support could be improved as they take days to ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Perfecto vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 29% of the time

Sauce Labs vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 20% of the time

BrowserStack vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 19% of the time

Appium vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab

Compared 16% of the time

More OpenText UFT Digital Lab Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 31% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 11% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 7% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Digital Lab

March 2025

Download OpenText UFT Digital Lab product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

March 2025

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro

Overview

Our enterprise-level solution is a complete, centralized lab of real mobile devices and emulators. With remote access, developers and testers can develop, debug, test, monitor, and optimize mobile apps from anywhere.

OpenText

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

OpenText

Sample Customers

Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. OpenText UFT One

February 2025

Free Report: OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. OpenText UFT One

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. OpenText UFT One and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. OpenText UFT One report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Mobile App 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.