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

OpenText UFT One vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 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
3rd
Ranking in Test Automation 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 (5th)
Telerik Test Studio
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
23rd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
12th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
25th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Load Testing Tools (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of OpenText UFT One is 10.0%, up from 9.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Telerik Test Studio is 1.4%, down from 1.5% 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.
Raghvendra Jyothi - PeerSpot reviewer
Very good performance and load testing capabilities
There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"​Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"It's simple to set up."
"One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA."
"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."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"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."
 

Cons

"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile."
"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."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"The solution needs better marketing, training, promotion, and visibility because it is not visible."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact."
"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"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."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."
"The tool's price is high."
"For the price of five automation licenses, you simply would not be able to hire five manual testers for two years worth of 24/7 manual testing work on demand."
"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."
"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."
"The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."
"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."
"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.