We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and Telerik Test Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."UFT has improved our ability to regression test."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."
"The stop automation is a great feature."
"Hidden among the kitchen sink of features is a new Data Generation tool called the Test Combinations Generator."
"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"I would like Micro Focus to provide more information on their portal about their newer products. The information about UFT One was outdated. The image recognition features could also be better."
"The solution does not have proper scripting."
"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews while Telerik Test Studio is ranked 18th in Functional Testing Tools with 5 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while Telerik Test Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Telerik Test Studio writes "Very good performance and load testing capabilities". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite, whereas Telerik Test Studio is most compared with Selenium HQ, Ranorex Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, Katalon Studio and Tricentis Tosca. See our OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Regression Testing Tools vendors, and best Test Automation 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.