OpenText UFT One vs ReadyAPI Test comparison

OpenText and SmartBear are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.3, while SmartBear is ranked #24 with an average rating of 7.3. OpenText holds a 9.5% mindshare in FT, compared to SmartBear’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of SmartBear users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT One

Read 92 OpenText UFT One reviews

8,465 Views
5,308 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

ReadyAPI Test

Read 31 ReadyAPI Test reviews

640 Views
530 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

ReadyAPI Test

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 11, 2024

OpenText UFT One and ReadyAPI Test are two competing products in the automated testing software market. User reviews indicate that while OpenText UFT One has strong points, ReadyAPI Test has advantages in several critical areas making it a preferred choice for some users despite potentially higher costs.

Features: OpenText UFT One users highlight its robust integration capabilities, strong support for various testing environments, and good automation tools. ReadyAPI Test is praised for its extensive support for API testing, user-friendly scriptless testing features, and comprehensive data-driven testing capabilities.

Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT One users suggest improvements in performance, better support for modern applications, and more robust debugging tools. ReadyAPI Test users desire better reporting features, enhanced performance under heavy loads, and more intuitive user interface.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText UFT One generally receives positive feedback on its deployment process but mixed reviews on customer support responsiveness. ReadyAPI Test is noted for its straightforward deployment and proactive support services, providing easier deployment and better customer support as notable advantages.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One is perceived as expensive by some users but delivers good ROI due to its extensive capabilities. ReadyAPI Test might have higher initial costs, but users feel the advanced API testing features justify the expense and provide an excellent ROI. Despite higher costs, ReadyAPI Test's ROI is perceived as superior due to its specialized features.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI Test Report (Updated: October 2024).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI Test

October 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 814,649 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT One

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

2nd

Ranking in API Testing Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Test Automation Tools (2nd)

ReadyAPI Test

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

24th

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

12th

Ranking in API Testing Tools

8th

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 9.5%, down from 9.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReadyAPI Test is 0.5%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Don Ingerson

QA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

Sep 29, 2022

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

Faiz Ahmed

Test Automation Specialist / Lead at Tata Consultancy Services

Oct 24, 2022

You can achieve any complex task with this tool

There aren't any plugins for UI automation. You need to make a custom code and download a job to put into the libraries. If it were panelized, then it would be straightforward. It should be in a panel of the tools, so you can add those tools as your test step in your test cases. For example, it would be nice to have a Selenium plugin available from the menu, where I can select "open browser" and provide the URL. That URL would be immediately open in the browser. This is like a keyword, and then the Selenium plugin should be there.

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

"The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."

"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."

"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."

"The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."

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

"One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA."

"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."

"It is a stable solution."

More OpenText UFT One pros

"The interface is user-friendly."

"Using SoapUI's automation suites to run all our test cases saved us a lot of time. Running 300 test cases takes about three to four days. When you automate all that, it takes only two to three hours."

"It's a very simple solution to use."

"SoapUI Pro is a good tool when it comes to API design and orchestration. Additionally, it is beneficial for functional and for performance testing."

"The tool’s scalability is very good."

"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."

"The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on."

"We used to write our own solutions, from small scripts to task web services, so this saves us thousands of hours."

Cons

"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."

"One area for improvement is its occasional slowness."

"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."

"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."

"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."

"Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact."

"The scripting language could be improved. They're currently using Visual Basic, but I think that people need something more advanced, like Python or Java."

"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."

More OpenText UFT One cons

"Stability has been an issue for us. It needs to be looked at and made a bit better."

"SoapUI Pro is a little heavy due to the number of features. Previously it was not that heavy. Now the tool is too heavy, they should work on fixing this issue because until your system has lots of resources, you won't be able to use it seamlessly. The performance of the application itself could improve."

"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."

"ReadyAPI Test needs to improve its reporting. While reports provide essential information when issues arise, or tests fail, having more graphical representations directly within the reports would be beneficial. It needs to improve stability and scalability as well. The tool's support is slow, and takes months to reach a solution."

"It is limited to scope and risk services only. It does have some support for JMS, but it is not out-of-the-box; you have to do some tweaks here and there."

"The UI could be a bit more flexible."

"The current interface is unsatisfactory."

"There are no bugs or glitches, but a few features available only in the Pro version could be made available in the open-source version. Some of the features do not necessarily need to be only available to Pro users. The data generator would be really useful for the open-source version users."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is reasonable."

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

"The tool's price is high."

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."

"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."

"It's an expensive solution."

"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

"I think the number of users is also limited, considering how much we pay."

"ReadyAPI Test is about $680 per user, per year."

"It is free of charge."

"My understanding is that the pricing is okay, however, that's taken care of by our procurement team. It's around $5,000 for three years."

"We have team members who are working in shifts, and it is not possible for us to utilize a single license on a single piece of hardware so that multiple team members can use it. We have to take out multiple licenses for each team member."

"The Pro version can be expensive for some companies. There are no costs in addition to the licensing fees."

"SoapUI Pro is open source but it has a subscription-based model which involves some more features. At the moment we are using the free version. The Pro version requires a license, and it is an annual license to use it."

"ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten."

More ReadyAPI Test pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Energy/Utilities Company

Financial Services Firm

24%

Computer Software Company

14%

Insurance Company

10%

Manufacturing 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?

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,...

See all answers

What do you like most about SoapUI Pro?

The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SoapUI Pro?

ReadyAPI Test is expensive, and I rate its pricing a four out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with SoapUI Pro?

ReadyAPI Test needs to improve its reporting. While reports provide essential information when issues arise, or tests fail, having more graphical representations directly within the reports would b...

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 10% of the time

UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 8% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 6% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

Postman vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 81% of the time

Broadcom Service Virtualization vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 11% of the time

ReadyAPI vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 4% of the time

Apigee vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 2% of the time

IBM Rational Test Workbench vs ReadyAPI Test

Compared 2% of the time

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

October 2024

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Buyer's Guide

ReadyAPI Test

October 2024

Download ReadyAPI Test product report

Also Known As

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

SoapUI NG Pro

Learn More

OpenText

SmartBear

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

For REST, SOAP and other popular API and IoT protocols, SoapUI NG Pro provides the industry's most comprehensive and easy-to-learn functional testing capabilities. Based on open core technology proven by millions of community members, SoapUI NG Pro helps you ensure that your APIs perform as intended, meet your business requirements, timeframes, and team skill sets right from day one.

Sample Customers

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

Apple, Cisco, FedEx, eBay, Microsoft, MasterCard, Pfizer, Nike, Oracle, Volvo, Lufthansa, Disney, HP, Intel, U.S. Air Force, Schindler

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI Test

October 2024

Free Report: OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI Test

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI Test and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI Test report.

See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Regression Testing Tools vendors, and best API Testing Tools vendors.

We monitor all Functional Testing 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.