Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText UFT One vs Perfecto comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Customer Service

No sentiment score available
OpenText customer service is praised for responsiveness, though experiences vary, with mixed satisfaction levels and reliance on partners for support.
No sentiment score available
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
 

Room For Improvement

Sentiment score
5.5
OpenText UFT One needs better object identification, browser compatibility, AI, integration, and interface, with concerns on cost and stability.
No sentiment score available
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
OpenText UFT One offers scalability and flexibility, though users note speed and browser issues; licensing affects usage costs.
No sentiment score available
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
 

Setup Cost

No sentiment score available
OpenText UFT One is praised for robust automation but criticized for high costs and complex licensing options.
No sentiment score available
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.1
OpenText UFT One's stability is generally reliable but varies with system requirements and can be affected by version changes.
No sentiment score available
 

Valuable Features

Sentiment score
8.5
OpenText UFT One excels in cross-platform compatibility, versatile scripting, and efficient automation for desktop, web, and mobile testing.
No sentiment score available
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT One
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th)
Perfecto
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
11th
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
3rd
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
13th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Mobile App Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 28.9%, up from 28.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Perfecto is 7.9%, down from 8.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile App Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Don Ingerson - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Roland Castelino - PeerSpot reviewer
Its reporting allows us to have a clear view regarding what tests have been executed
The most valuable would be their Live Stream analysis, where I can see the live analysis of all the executions on a single device or multiple devices as well as track them. The live analysis and reporting would be the single most valuable feature. We leverage Perfecto’s reporting and analytics a lot. From the CI Dashboard, it is mainly the status, which is the past, failure count, and time consumption, e.g., how much time did an average test or script take? Along with that, it provides the historical view compared to the previous result, e.g., am I a pass or fail? Also, the stack trace is very important. Whenever a pass occurs, we don't look beyond that. However, whenever a failure occurs, the stack trace information that it gives us is pretty critical for us when figuring out where failures lie. It gives a summary for the pass/fail count, total test count, the historical view, time consumption for each test as well as the total tests, and the stack rate of the failure. Perfecto's analytics are very important since we use them on a daily basis. We run our executions daily. After every execution, we pull information from the Perfecto reporting system and share that with our stakeholders. Having this information accurately reported is pretty important for us, so everybody is aware of the current status of the product. That way, we can evaluate the health of the product or environment against that which has been executed. Therefore, it helps make those real-time decisions and highlights the impact to the business. I found Perfecto to be pretty easy to use while executing against cross-platforms. The main reason is because the same script or test automation where we execute on multiple platforms has minimal changes that I need to do. Also, it is easy for me to set up an execution on one platform, then on another platform, either in parallel or one after the other. Parallel opportunities save me time. Once the execution has been completed across these different configurations, I can always check and compare, e.g., what are the differences and consistencies? We utilize Perfecto’s cloud-based lab to test across devices, browsers, and OSs. I use it occasionally for manual testing. Though, there are other team members who use it more frequently than I do. I use it mainly for executing my automated tests. We have the Perfecto lab, cloud devices, and machines. I can program my test to execute against any of those devices, which gives me more confidence in my product. I can compare and see how my product or application functionally behaves across these different devices and from a UI point of view, which helps me a lot. The device lab is extremely important to our testing operations. We rely on having multiple devices up and running all the time. Whenever we kick off an execution, there are multiple reasons why executions may get triggered: * CodeCommit * A scheduled job. * Might be on-demand by any stakeholder. We need the lab to be available, as we need devices up and running for executions to take place. Also, the devices help since they allow us to have parallel execution, and not just wait for a sequential device to become free and available. Therefore, volume is definitely key. It also gives us an opportunity to compare execution across platforms in that space. It is extremely important to you that the lab provides same-day access to new devices since we analyze that data every single day after execution. Perfecto provides their own framework called Quantum Framework. That is one option. The other option is, if I want to have my own framework, I can have a Java-based Maven project, take a Selenium library, AppiumLibrary, and REST Assured library, and utilize the open-source framework. It is easy for us to connect to Perfecto, no matter what framework we use, as long as it has these core libraries in it. I can design and structure it any way that I want. The execution will happen in Perfecto no matter what since they have support for these tools or libraries. It is pretty neat that way. We are not dependent on using just one particular framework to use Perfecto. While there are still some framework limitations, there is the opportunity to use multiple, different open-source frameworks, then pass the execution to Perfecto. We can use most frameworks, then design and craft it any way that we want, then just pass the execution to Perfecto.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile App Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Recreational Facilities/Services Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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...
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.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT One?
The solution should have additional features, but not much. It already has some sort of artificial intelligence that must be developed. It needs to be in trend. The solution needs better marketing,...
What do you like most about Perfecto?
Mobile testing is the most valuable feature as it has reduced dependency on physical devices. We are located offshore and we don't have the physical devices, and shipping physical devices after eve...
What needs improvement with Perfecto?
It is slow compared to physical device testing. The interactive speed could be improved. And sometimes we have issues with our app not working properly with Perfecto. Even though it is working perf...
What is your primary use case for Perfecto?
We use it for manual mobile testing and a little bit of web testing.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)
Perfecto Mobile, Perfecto Web
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Virgin Media, Paychex, Rabobank, R+V, Discover
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. Perfecto and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.