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 8.1, while Qt Group is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.5. OpenText holds a 10.0% mindshare in TAt, compared to Qt Group’s 3.1% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Qt Group users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT One

Read 96 OpenText UFT One reviews

7,434 Views
4,702 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Qt Squish

Read 20 Qt Squish reviews

2,493 Views
1,298 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: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. Qt Squish

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 848,716 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

OpenText UFT One offers over 300% ROI by enhancing efficiency, reducing costs, and supporting diverse systems through AI capabilities.

Sentiment score

7.3

Qt Squish reduced manual testing time, enabled agile cycles, improved efficiency, and optimized processes with stable automation suites.

The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.

Badari Mallireddy

QA Automation Architect at Emerson

Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.

Andres_Gomez

Support Engineer at a computer software company with 11-50 employees

We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.

Pierre CAHAY

Senior Manager at Deloitte

For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report

For the part that has been automated in Qt, not everything is suitable for automation.

Luc Vangrunderbeeck

Software Test Engineer at Infrabel

For more quotes and insights, download the Qt Squish report

Customer Service

Sentiment score

6.2

Users report varied OpenText UFT One support experiences, noting quick responses but sometimes slow resolutions, especially for complex issues.

Sentiment score

6.9

Qt Squish's customer service is efficient and knowledgeable, with quick responses, but video support can be expensive.

Organizations can't wait for this lengthy process, especially when they are under pressure with their timelines.

Badari Mallireddy

QA Automation Architect at Emerson

Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.

Andres_Gomez

Support Engineer at a computer software company with 11-50 employees

The technical support is rated eight out of ten.

Pierre CAHAY

Senior Manager at Deloitte

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 scales well with proper licensing management, though execution speed and large test volumes may pose challenges.

Sentiment score

7.2

Qt Squish is praised for scalability, especially with floating licenses, but some face minor issues like image recognition glitches.

The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.

Andres_Gomez

Support Engineer at a computer software company with 11-50 employees

For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report

With one license, just one user or one test scenario can be run at a time.

Luc Vangrunderbeeck

Software Test Engineer at Infrabel

For more quotes and insights, download the Qt Squish report

Stability Issues

Sentiment score

6.5

Users have mixed opinions on OpenText UFT One's stability, noting issues with crashing and updates affecting performance.

Sentiment score

8.0

Users report high stability with Qt Squish, experiencing minimal issues, which are quickly resolved by support and updates.

One of the key stability issues was that Windows would consume memory without releasing it, leading to regression testing crashes.

David-Whitehouse

QA Lead at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees

For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report

No quotes available

For more quotes and insights, download the Qt Squish report

Room For Improvement

OpenText UFT One needs performance and stability improvements, enhanced browser compatibility, intuitive interface, and better technical support.

Qt Squish needs improvements in object identification, testing stability, integration, and enhanced support for non-Qt applications while addressing pricing and speed issues.

We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing.

David-Whitehouse

QA Lead at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees

If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.

Badari Mallireddy

QA Automation Architect at Emerson

Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.

Andres_Gomez

Support Engineer at a computer software company with 11-50 employees

For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report

If you want to run it for different versions of the software, then you need the Qt version of Java.

Luc Vangrunderbeeck

Software Test Engineer at Infrabel

For more quotes and insights, download the Qt Squish report

Setup Cost

OpenText UFT One, though pricey, offers robust automation features and integration, making it valuable for enterprises needing extensive capabilities.

Qt Squish receives mixed reviews for its pricing, with high costs and inflexible licensing compared to other tools.

There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.

Badari Mallireddy

QA Automation Architect at Emerson

It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.

Andres_Gomez

Support Engineer at a computer software company with 11-50 employees

The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.

Pierre CAHAY

Senior Manager at Deloitte

For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report

For the developer license, it is about $5200 a year.

Luc Vangrunderbeeck

Software Test Engineer at Infrabel

For more quotes and insights, download the Qt Squish report

Valuable Features

OpenText UFT One provides comprehensive cross-technology testing automation with strong compatibility, integration, and innovative AI testing capabilities.

Qt Squish is a versatile UI testing tool praised for cross-platform support, Python compatibility, and seamless CI integration.

UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.

Badari Mallireddy

QA Automation Architect at Emerson

OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier.

David-Whitehouse

QA Lead at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees

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

Andres_Gomez

Support Engineer at a computer software company with 11-50 employees

For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report

For the parts that have been automated in Qt, not everything is suitable for automation.

Luc Vangrunderbeeck

Software Test Engineer at Infrabel

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

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (2nd), Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (3rd), API Testing Tools (6th)

Qt Squish

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

9th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Test Automation Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 10.0%, down from 10.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qt Squish is 3.1%, up from 2.7% 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

Luc Vangrunderbeeck

Software Test Engineer at Infrabel

Testing solution supports Java testing with good reliability

There is nothing you can do for almost every application. If you do it for a single version, it is rather easy. However, if you want to run it for different versions of the software, then you need the Qt version of Java. You need to set up some special environment variables to be able to do that.

Read full review

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

848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

13%

Government

Manufacturing Company

21%

Computer Software Company

17%

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?

I'm aware of the price from three or four years ago, and it depends on the number of users. For the developer license, it is about $5200 a year.

See all answers

What needs improvement with froglogic Squish?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for froglogic Squish?

I am not really using the solution during development, however, for regression and automatic regression tests, I am using it. I use it to do visual Qt, which focuses on the GUI part of the applicat...

See all answers

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 31% of the time

OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 12% of the time

Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

UiPath Test Cloud vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

Selenium HQ vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 1% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

Ranorex Studio vs Qt Squish

Compared 22% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Qt Squish

Compared 17% of the time

Eggplant Test vs Qt Squish

Compared 11% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Qt Squish

Compared 11% of the time

Selenium HQ vs Qt Squish

Compared 4% of the time

More Qt Squish Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

April 2025

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Buyer's Guide

Qt Squish

April 2025

Download Qt Squish product report

Also Known As

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

froglogic Squish

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

OpenText

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.

Qt Group

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

April 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: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

848,716 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.