OpenText Functional Testing vs Oracle Application Testing Suite comparison

OpenText and Oracle are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #4 with an average rating of 7.8, while Oracle is ranked #22. OpenText holds a 6.4% mindshare in FT, compared to Oracle’s 1.7% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of Oracle users who would recommend it.

OpenText Functional Testing

Read 98 OpenText Functional Testing reviews

8,163 Views
5,714 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Oracle Application Testing ...

Read 24 Oracle Application Testing Suite reviews

1,680 Views
941 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

OpenText Functional Testing

Oracle Application Testing ...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

OpenText Functional Testing and Oracle Application Testing Suite are leading products in the functional testing software category. OpenText seems to have an edge in browser support and business process integration, while Oracle excels in integration with Oracle products and ease of automation for Oracle E-Business Suite.

Features: OpenText Functional Testing supports a range of browsers including IE, Chrome, and Firefox and integrates robustly with ALM configurations. It is known for its strong object recognition and business process testing. Oracle Application Testing Suite integrates seamlessly with Oracle products, using tools like OpenScript for effective automation of Oracle E-Business Suite. Its functional testing tools are praised for ease of use.

Room for Improvement: OpenText faces challenges in object identification reliability and needs to minimize memory usage. Users also highlight issues with cross-browser compatibility and test speed. Oracle's improvements could include broader browser support and simplification of setup for desktop applications. Better integration with third-party tools and enhanced reporting features are also desired.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Functional Testing is mainly on-premises but offers cloud options, with customer support reviews being mixed due to response times. Oracle Application Testing Suite supports hybrid cloud environments, praised for its versatile deployment models and effective customer support, though the initial setup remains complex.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing is considered pricey with high licensing costs but offers significant ROI through its comprehensive features and automation capabilities. Oracle Application Testing Suite offers competitive and flexible pricing, particularly favorable for enterprises using Oracle's ecosystem, leading to quicker ROI with fewer additional costs than OpenText.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText Functional Testing vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,565 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 Functional Testing

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (5th), Test Automation Tools (5th)

Oracle Application Testing ...

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

22nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Performance Testing Tools (14th), Load Testing Tools (13th)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText Functional Testing is 6.4%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Application Testing Suite is 1.7%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing	6.4%
Oracle Application Testing Suite	1.7%
Other	91.9%

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Kevin Copple

Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

Has supported faster test execution and increased flexibility while offering room to improve support responsiveness

Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve. They tend to have an entry-level person that may not be as familiar with the product that fields the calls, which creates another day of delay to get to the level that's needed. This is a common practice across most companies where you call, you get the entry-level person, and then they work their way up to help screen calls so that they are more focused.

Read full review

Rishabh-Sharma

Senior Engineer at Cignity Technology

Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy

Oracle Application Testing Suite can improve by covering more browsers as compared to other solutions because they're considering the Edge browser as well, but the solution is working on different Windows operating platforms. For example, in our current Windows 2012 R2 server, if I want to automate the Edge browser, I need to upgrade that particular Windows to Windows 10.1 or some other Windows platform, because it's not supported in Windows 2012 feature. That is an issue. If cross-browsers can be incorporated, then support should be provided. There should be a single operating system where everything can be incorporated. I have faced issues with some indexing items. For example, the solution is able to derive some properties from the screen, such as button locations or text locations, but there are some elements, for example, unnamed buttons or text, where there is no name or ID or any other identifying information. Indexing doesn't always work, and we have to go to those elements manually and inspect them to determine their class, and then input that information into the system.

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 object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests."

"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."

"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."

"Hidden among the kitchen sink of features is a new Data Generation tool called the Test Combinations Generator."

"The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."

"The solution has good out-of-the-box protocols."

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

"The solution is easy to integrate with other platforms."

More OpenText Functional Testing pros

"The function test feature is valuable."

"The solution is scalable."

"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"

"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."

"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."

"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."

"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."

"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature."

More Oracle Application Testing Suite pros

Cons

"They should include AI-based testing features."

"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."

"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."

"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."

"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."

"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."

"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."

"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."

More OpenText Functional Testing cons

"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."

"I would like to see better dashboards."

"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."

"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."

"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."

"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."

"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."

"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."

More Oracle Application Testing Suite cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"The price is only $3,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company. Probably no more than five or 10. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't see that being an issue."

"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."

"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."

"Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."

"The tool's price is high."

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

"The pricing of the product is an issue."

More OpenText Functional Testing pricing and cost advice

"The complete package, including load testing and performance analysis, has a licensing fee."

"Customers need to negotiate properly to get the tool at a lower price."

"ORACLE is giving at a very competitive rates to all its customers, and its a simple licensing process."

"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."

"The price of the Oracle Application Testing Suite is not expensive. It is less expensive than other solutions."

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

881,565 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

Government

13%

Computer Software Company

10%

Performing Arts

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	20
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	71

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	13

Questions from the Community

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?

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 17% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 7% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 6% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 5% of the time

IBM DevOps Test UI vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 2% of the time

More OpenText Functional Testing Competitors

Tricentis Tosca vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 12% of the time

IBM Engineering Test Management vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 6% of the time

Perfecto vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 5% of the time

SoftLogica WAPT Pro vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Core Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Cloud) vs Oracle Application Testing Suite

Compared 5% of the time

More Oracle Application Testing Suite Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing

January 2026

Download OpenText Functional Testing product report

Buyer's Guide

Oracle Application Testing Suite

January 2026

Download Oracle Application Testing Suite product report

Also Known As

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

OATS

Overview

OpenText Functional Testing provides automated testing with compatibility across technologies, browsers, and platforms. It targets APIs, GUIs, and applications like SAP and Oracle for efficient test automation, emphasizing usability and integration with tools such as Jenkins and ALM.

OpenText Functional Testing offers wide-ranging automation capabilities for functional and regression testing, API testing, and automation across web, desktop, and mainframe applications. It supports script recording and object identification, appealing to less technical users. Despite its advantages, it grapples with memory issues, stability concerns, and a challenging scripting environment. Its VBScript reliance limits flexibility, generating demand for enhanced language support and speed improvement. Users appreciate its role in continuous integration and deployment processes, managing test data efficiently, and reducing manual testing efforts.

What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing?

Multiplatform Compatibility: Works seamlessly across technologies, browsers, and platforms.
Automation Span: Provides automation for APIs, GUIs, SAP, and Oracle applications.
Intuitive Design: Object identification and recording simplify usage for all coding levels.
Integration Capabilities: Interfaces with tools like Jenkins and ALM for streamlined testing.
Built-in Frameworks: Offers frameworks like BPT for accelerated test development.

What benefits and ROI should users consider?

Reduced Manual Testing: Minimizes the effort required for manual testing tasks.
Time Efficiency: Accelerates testing processes with user-friendly features.
Seamless Integration: Integrates with CI/CD tools, enhancing operational productivity.
Comprehensive Coverage: Automates test cases involving multiple scenarios effectively.

In industries like finance and healthcare, OpenText Functional Testing is leveraged for end-to-end automation, ensuring streamlined processes and accuracy in testing. Many companies utilize it for efficient test data management and integrating testing within continuous integration/deployment operations.

OpenText

Application Testing Suite is a comprehensive, integrated testing solution that ensures the quality, scalability, and availability of your Web applications, Web Services, packaged Oracle Applications and Oracle databases.

Oracle

Sample Customers

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

Comic Relief UK, The Forestry Commission, TAFE SA, Silentnight Group, Victorian Department of Primary Industries

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Functional Testing vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite

January 2026

Free Report: OpenText Functional Testing vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Functional Testing vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,565 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText Functional Testing vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite report.

See our list of best Functional Testing 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.