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

OpenText UFT One vs Selenium HQ 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT One
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
95
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th), Test Automation Tools (2nd)
Selenium HQ
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
4th
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 9.9%, up from 9.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Selenium HQ is 4.4%, down from 5.9% 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.
Abhishek-Tiwari - PeerSpot reviewer
An open-source solution that has significantly reduced costs for the company
One limitation of Selenium is that it is purely focused on web application testing. For example, if there is a webpage where we need to upload some documents or emails in the webpage and I want to automate that scenario with the help of Selenium, it will not be possible. I can not upload any documents because when I am clicking on the browser the Windows pop up will appear. It would be beneficial if Selenium HQ would develop integrated plugins, and inbuilt features, which would help us to automate Windows based applications. With the help of other third party plugins, like AutoIt, Robot Class, or Sikuli we can integrate Windows based applications. Another limitation of Selenium HQ is that we can not automate the capture part. EML processing is not available in Selenium, particularly if a website requires some capture kind of validations before logging into the application. To overcome this situation, we can disable the capture part from the application side, so we can get access to the database directly.

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."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"Automation of tests is done very fast with UFT One."
"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."
"The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"It is a good automation tool."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are the automation of all UI tests, its open-source, reliability, and is supported by Google."
"The main characteristic that is useful is that the tool is completely free."
"The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing."
"The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel."
"The plugins, the components, and the method of the library with Selenium is very user defined."
"It is very stable."
"All the features in Selenium to automate the UI."
 

Cons

"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"One thing that confused me, and now just mildly irritates me, is that we migrated from QuickTest Pro to HP UFT, Unified Functional Test. After we did the migration, it turned out that we didn't really have Unified Functional Test at all."
"The user interface could be improved"
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"They should include AI-based testing features."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"You need to have experience in order to do the initial setup."
"If they can integrate more recording features, like UFT, it would be helpful for automation, but it's not necessary. They can also add a few more reporting features for advanced reporting."
"Selenium uses a layer-based approach that is somewhat slower than Eggplant when it comes to executing code."
"Selenium HQ can be complex. The interface requires a QA engineer or an expert to use it."
"If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely."
"It is not easy to make IE plus Selenium work good as other browsers. Firefox and Chrome are the best ones to work with Selenium."
"Selenium Grid set-up is bit complex."
"​To simplify the development process, everyone needs to do a Selenium Framework to acquire the web application functions and features from Selenium methods."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."
"It's an expensive solution."
"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."
"The solution is open source."
"It is an open-source tool."
"Selenium is open-source, so there are no setup costs associated with it."
"There is no pricing cost. License is Apache License 2.0."
"It is an open-source product, it is free for anyone to use."
"It is free to use."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
"Selenium HQ is a free solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
831,158 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%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
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...
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 ...
How do I choose between Selenium HQ and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence?
Selenium HQ’s biggest advantage is that it is customizable. Its other most valuable feature is that the driver interface is really helpful and user-friendly; Selenium HQ makes it easy to navigate t...
What do you like most about Selenium HQ?
Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Selenium HQ?
Selenium is easy to install and mostly free, so there's no need for a license. This lack of costs makes it an attractive option.
 

Also Known As

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

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, experitest, Tricentis GmbH, SmartBear Software
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. Selenium HQ and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.