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

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 10.4% mindshare in TAt, compared to Qt Group’s 3.1% 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 94 OpenText UFT One reviews
  • 8,754 Views
  • 5,469 Comparison Views
88% willing to recommend
Qt Squish
Read 19 Qt Squish reviews
  • 2,572 Views
  • 1,405 Comparison Views
95% willing to recommend
 

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.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. Qt Squish Report (Updated: November 2024).
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One vs. Qt Squish
November 2024
Download the complete report
Helped 824,053 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.5
Organizations using OpenText UFT One experience up to 300% ROI through enhanced efficiency and 60% test automation.
Sentiment score
7.8
Qt Squish users saved time by automating tests, supporting agile practices with 50% coverage, benefiting organizations including non-profits.
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the Qt Squish report
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.3
OpenText UFT One's customer service is praised for expertise but faces challenges with response speed and technician knowledge variability.
Sentiment score
7.3
Qt Squish customer support is praised for quick, effective service, with users valuing responsive, competent assistance and engineering solutions.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the Qt Squish report
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText UFT One is highly scalable, adaptable for varying team sizes, with some execution speed challenges in large test suites.
No sentiment score available
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the Qt Squish report
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
Opinions on OpenText UFT One's stability vary, with some users experiencing stability issues influenced by system specifications and configurations.
No sentiment score available
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText UFT One needs improvements in compatibility, performance, technology support, integration, cost, and usability for enhanced user experience.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the Qt Squish report
 

Setup Cost

OpenText UFT One is costly but valued for reducing manual testing and enhancing automation efficiency, sometimes offering discounts.
Enterprise users find Qt Squish easy to set up but costly, with simple yet inflexible named and group licensing.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the Qt Squish report
 

Valuable Features

OpenText UFT One is versatile, supporting multiple platforms with AI capabilities and robust integration for comprehensive test automation.
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the Qt Squish report
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT One
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
94
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
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 10.4%, down from 10.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qt Squish is 3.1%, 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 - 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.
Read full review
AnirbanSarkar - PeerSpot reviewer
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
report
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
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
20%
Computer Software Company
18%
Healthcare Company
7%
Transportation 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...
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?
The user interface could be improved.
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 Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 31% of the time
OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One Logo
OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 11% of the time
Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One Logo
Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 10% of the time
UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One Logo
UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 8% of the time
SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One Logo
SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 6% of the time
More OpenText UFT One Competitors
SmartBear TestComplete vs Qt Squish Logo
SmartBear TestComplete vs Qt Squish
Compared 21% of the time
Ranorex Studio vs Qt Squish Logo
Ranorex Studio vs Qt Squish
Compared 20% of the time
Eggplant Test vs Qt Squish Logo
Eggplant Test vs Qt Squish
Compared 13% of the time
Katalon Studio vs Qt Squish Logo
Katalon Studio vs Qt Squish
Compared 9% of the time
OpenText Silk Test vs Qt Squish Logo
OpenText Silk Test vs Qt Squish
Compared 3% of the time
More Qt Squish Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One
November 2024
OpenText UFT One reportDownload OpenText UFT One product report
Buyer's Guide
Qt Squish
December 2024
Qt Squish reportDownload 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
November 2024
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: November 2024.
DOWNLOAD NOW
824,053 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.