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 882,032 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

"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."

"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."

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

"OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much 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 OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."

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

More OpenText Functional Testing pros

"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."

"The function test feature is valuable."

"The solution is scalable."

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

"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."

"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."

"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."

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

More Oracle Application Testing Suite pros

Cons

"I would like Micro Focus to provide more information on their portal about their newer products. The information about UFT One was outdated. The image recognition features could also be better."

"We'd like it to have less scripting."

"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."

"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."

"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function."

"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."

"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."

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

More OpenText Functional Testing cons

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

"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."

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

"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."

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

"I would like to see better dashboards."

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

"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."

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."

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

"HPE recently extended the demo license period from 30 days to 60 days which was a very wise and popular decision to give potential customers more time to install it and try it for free. Even if your company has a salesperson come in and demo UFT, I would highly encourage at least one of your developers or automation engineers to download and install it to explore for themselves the functionality and features included during the demo trial period."

"It's an expensive solution."

"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."

"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."

"The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""

"The tool's price is high."

More OpenText Functional Testing pricing and cost advice

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

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

"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."

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

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

882,032 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

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 19% of the time

OpenText Functional Testing for Developers vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 6% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 5% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText Functional Testing

Compared 5% of the time

Selenium HQ 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

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

Compared 5% of the time

SoftLogica WAPT Pro 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

882,032 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.