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

OpenText UFT One vs ReadyAPI comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

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 enhances efficiency and productivity with automation, AI capabilities, and supports achieving up to 300% ROI.
Sentiment score
7.8
ReadyAPI offers significant returns through ease of integration, cost savings, and efficiency, justifying its initial challenges and investment.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
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.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText UFT One's customer service is generally efficient but inconsistent, with varied experiences in support quality and response time.
Sentiment score
6.8
ReadyAPI support is responsive but varies by license; some users face delays, with documentation sometimes lacking crucial information.
After creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText UFT One is scalable, integrating with Jenkins, but success depends on licensing, automation quality, and deployment strategy.
Sentiment score
6.8
ReadyAPI efficiently manages large-scale API testing across machines with scalability, but may require additional licenses for extensive use.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
I rate ReadyAPI between five to six for scalability due to complexities associated with scripting.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
OpenText UFT One generally exhibits stability, though some users report performance issues, often resolved through updates. Satisfaction remains high.
Sentiment score
7.2
ReadyAPI is stable and reliable for routine tasks but experiences occasional issues with large files and licensing.
Once all configurations and preparations are done, it is very stable.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText UFT One requires improvements in stability, compatibility, speed, memory use, object recognition, and integration with open-source tools.
ReadyAPI needs improved dashboard, integration, performance, UI, version control, CI pipeline support, cloud capabilities, and licensing management.
If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
 

Setup Cost

OpenText UFT One licensing is costly, leading organizations to mix different license types and evaluate ROI against open-source alternatives.
ReadyAPI offers flexible pricing from $1,000 to $7,000, valued for comprehensive API testing despite being pricier than open-source.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
The pricing of ReadyAPI is reasonable, considering its functionality compared to other tools in the market.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText UFT One provides versatile automation with cross-platform compatibility, easy use, robust testing, and integration with key technologies.
ReadyAPI is ideal for large organizations, offering user-friendly API testing with robust automation, integrations, and extensive features.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
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.
ReadyAPI is valuable for web service automation and allowing us to generate test cases and automate processes.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT One
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
95
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th), Test Automation Tools (2nd)
ReadyAPI
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
17th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
Performance Testing Tools (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 9.8%, up from 9.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI is 1.4%, down from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional 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.
SandeepSingh9 - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper
One of the features of ReadyAPI that's worth mentioning is that it allows you to parameterize. I'm working with more than two hundred resources, so I don't have to go and make a small change at each point every time. I have the option to just parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere. Another valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it provides a customized environment. In my company, you work in different environments, such as QA, UAT, and LT, so the URLs for every environment are different. In ReadyAPI, you can customize your environment, set it up, then start working on it. Another feature worth mentioning that's offered in ReadyAPI is automating your test value as the tool allows Groovy scripting. In your test case, you can use a Groovy script that says that in a particular test case, you have ten resources, but you just want to exhibit five and that you don't want to exhibit the remaining five. You can write a small Groovy script that lets you execute just five resources out of the ten resources. I also like that ReadyAPI allows you to read the data from CFC and Excel. It also allows you to create or customize your data, but that only works at a certain point because every application has its specific data. ReadyAPI cannot generate every data, but when I'm posting and I want to generate a random name, such as a first name, I can do it in ReadyAPI. The tool also has many different features which I find valuable, including Git integration.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
832,138 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
6%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
16%
Insurance Company
8%
Government
6%
 

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?
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 ...
What do you like most about ReadyAPI?
The performance testing capabilities are very good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ReadyAPI?
The pricing of ReadyAPI is reasonable, considering its functionality compared to other tools in the market. However, I recommend open-source solutions for small-scale industries due to lower costs.
What needs improvement with ReadyAPI?
Based on my experience, ReadyAPI could improve by simplifying the process of scripting. The automation features require extensive Groovy scripting, which is cumbersome compared to JMeter's regular ...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Healthcare Data Solutions (HDS)
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.