OpenText UFT One vs Qt Squish comparison

OpenText and Qt Group are both solutions in the Test Automation Tools category. OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.2, while Qt Group is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.6. OpenText holds a 10.6% mindshare in TAt, compared to Qt Group’s 3.0% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Qt Group users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT One

Read 95 OpenText UFT One reviews

8,510 Views
5,319 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Qt Squish

Read 19 Qt Squish reviews

2,521 Views
1,373 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

Qt Squish

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT One and Qt Squish are competitive tools in the automated testing landscape. OpenText UFT One has the upper hand in enterprises requiring broad application support and extensive integration capabilities, whereas Qt Squish is preferred for its cross-platform support and effective GUI application testing.

Features: OpenText UFT One integrates easily with diverse systems, offers comprehensive regression testing, and provides strong support for multiple technologies. Qt Squish supports automated test creation with popular scripting languages, excels in identifying complex GUI elements, and provides robust cross-platform functionality.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT One can enhance performance in complex deployments, reduce the complexity of its initial setup, and improve resource usage efficiency. Qt Squish may advance object recognition for non-Qt applications, streamline its scripting interface, and enhance integration with complementary testing tools.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText UFT One's deployment is complex due to its rich feature set, yet it provides solid documentation and support. Qt Squish, while simpler to deploy, focuses on offering rapid customer service responses with technical expertise.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One involves higher setup costs but delivers significant ROI for larger organizations utilizing its expansive features. Qt Squish has a lower cost of entry, making it appealing for smaller projects, particularly those focused on GUI applications, promising a compelling ROI without extensive infrastructure dependencies.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. Qt Squish Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. Qt Squish

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 831,265 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 One

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th)

Qt Squish

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

9th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 10.6%, down from 10.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qt Squish is 3.0%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Test Automation Tools

Featured Reviews

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

AnirbanSarkar

Head - Solution Management Group at Meteonic Innovation Pvt. Ltd.

Seamless functionality, plug-and-play installation, and highly reliable

There had been a lot of improvements with froglogic Squish already. There were some scenarios in which this particular solution was available in different flavors. They have pulled everything together in one solution. There were some monitoring systems, which were missing out from the solution earlier. They have a centralized dashboard for monitoring the test cases and their execution. It's a full-blown solution, there are not many glitches in terms of something missing out of the package. The froglogic Squish solution is only handling GUI regression testing, this is its forte. However, a lot of clients are looking into performance testing associated with it. If a performance testing capability can be added as a part of it, this would bring great value. froglogic Squish has a code coverage solution and they have done a pretty good job on it. The penetration testing could be added as a separate module, this would be beneficial.

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

"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."

"Has improved our organization by allowing us to obtain fast, detailed information about the behavior of our products and to supply this to the customer, enabling us to work together without the need for special programming knowledge."

"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."

"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."

"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."

"UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use."

"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."

"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."

More OpenText UFT One pros

"froglogic Squish is one of the most desired solutions if you are having a Qt as a framework and if you are looking at GUI regression testing. froglogic is a part of Qt as a company."

"I like the dashboard. It's virtual, and you can see the customer results. I can do it at night and in the morning. I think it also automatically emails results."

"The initial setup process is straightforward."

"This product can work with QT applications and cross-cut from them on Windows or Mac."

"I find it very user-friendly and easy to start working with. The main benefit for me is that it allows testing applications developed in the Qt language. This capability makes Squish a game-changer, as it's the only tool I've found that enables automation for applications written in Qt. I appreciate three main aspects. Firstly, the documentation is excellent. Secondly, I value the way the tool efficiently locates elements during testing. These are the two aspects I particularly like."

"Squish is integrated with Qt, which enables us to test the user interface effectively."

Cons

"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."

"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."

"They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost."

"There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT."

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

"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."

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

"You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out."

More OpenText UFT One cons

"The price could be better."

"We encountered issues with the embedded environment and building for the Qt version."

"I'm relatively new to Squish, so I'm not familiar with all its pros and cons. Currently, I haven't identified any specific improvements. However, one feature I miss is Git integration within the tool. In my previous experience with Selenium and Python in PyCharm, it was straightforward to create and review changes before pushing them. I haven't found a similar option in Squish, and having an integrated tool for managing conflicts would be beneficial in certain scenarios where collaboration is involved."

"There had been a lot of improvements with froglogic Squish already. There were some scenarios in which this particular solution was available in different flavors. They have pulled everything together in one solution. There were some monitoring systems, which were missing out from the solution earlier. They have a centralized dashboard for monitoring the test cases and their execution. It's a full-blown solution, there are not many glitches in terms of something missing out of the package."

"ID could be improved with suggestions of names, variables or class."

"The platform could be improved by implementing some basic functionalities that are frequently used, such as login procedures and screen handling when multiple screens are used at the workplace."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 licensing and pricing model is confusing."

"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."

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

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

"The price is reasonable."

"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."

"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."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

"It is expensive."

"The price could be better. I believe each developer license costs about 6000 or 7000 Euros per year."

"The platform is highly-priced."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Energy/Utilities Company

Manufacturing Company

20%

Computer Software Company

18%

Healthcare Company

Transportation Company

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...

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

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for froglogic Squish?

Qt and Squish are considered to be on the expensive side compared to other software development tools. The pricing is not very flexible, which has been noted as a concern.

See all answers

What needs improvement with froglogic Squish?

We encountered issues with the embedded environment and building for the Qt version. Upgrading Qt and Squish can be annoying and would be better if Squish were more integrated with Qt, to ease the ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for froglogic Squish?

We use Qt Squish primarily for test automation in our embedded systems. While I configure it and set it up, another person uses it for testing. We also use Squish integrated with Qt, a framework fo...

See all answers

Comparisons

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 Suite vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 6% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

SmartBear TestComplete vs Qt Squish

Compared 20% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs Qt Squish

Compared 20% of the time

Eggplant Test vs Qt Squish

Compared 13% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Qt Squish

Compared 10% of the time

UiPath Test Suite vs Qt Squish

Compared 4% of the time

More Qt Squish Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

January 2025

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Buyer's Guide

Qt Squish

January 2025

Download Qt Squish product report

Also Known As

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

froglogic Squish

Learn More

OpenText

Qt Group

Overview

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

Take the complexity out of testing graphical user interfaces (GUIs) and human-machine interfaces (HMIs) – even in the face of product evolution and safety-critical applications.

Sample Customers

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

Google, Nokia, Pfizer, Siemens, Synopsys, Airbus, Boeing, Mercedes Benz, Disney, Shell, Reuters, Vodafone, XILINX, GE, Ericsson

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. Qt Squish

January 2025

Free Report: OpenText UFT One vs. Qt Squish

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. Qt Squish and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT One vs. Qt Squish report.

See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Test Automation 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.