OpenText UFT One vs Telerik Test Studio comparison

OpenText and Progress Software are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.2, while Progress Software is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.3. OpenText holds a 9.9% mindshare in FT, compared to Progress Software’s 1.4% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Progress Software users who would recommend it.

OpenText UFT One

Read 95 OpenText UFT One reviews

7,705 Views
4,836 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Telerik Test Studio

Read 5 Telerik Test Studio reviews

1,114 Views
716 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText UFT One

Telerik Test Studio

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

OpenText UFT One and Telerik Test Studio are competing products in the automated testing tools category. Data comparisons suggest OpenText UFT One has the upper hand due to its robust integration capabilities and broader testing scope.

Features:OpenText UFT One provides advanced integration capabilities, extensive test automation for mobile, web, and enterprise applications, and supports a wide range of technologies and protocols. Telerik Test Studio is known for agile automation testing, robust debugging features, and offers coded steps for complex scenarios along with an intuitive recording mechanism.

Room for Improvement:OpenText UFT One could benefit from simplifying its setup process, improving its user interface for beginners, and enhancing performance for complex test scenarios. Telerik Test Studio would improve by expanding its testing scope, providing better integration options, and offering more advanced reporting features.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service:OpenText UFT One involves a more complex setup but includes comprehensive support through extensive documentation and support channels. Telerik Test Studio offers a straightforward deployment process, focusing on rapid implementation with accessible support services.

Pricing and ROI:OpenText UFT One requires a higher initial investment, justifiable by its expansive test coverage and integration benefits suitable for large enterprises. Telerik Test Studio, offers competitive pricing with faster ROI, appealing to agile teams due to its efficient setup and robust capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 831,265 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th)

Telerik Test Studio

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

16th

Ranking in Regression Testing Tools

8th

Ranking in Test Automation Tools

17th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Load Testing Tools (12th)

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 Telerik Test Studio is 1.4%, down from 1.4% 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

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

Raghvendra Jyothi

Manager Project Management at Capgemini

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.

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 initial setup is relatively easy."

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

"Hidden among the kitchen sink of features is a new Data Generation tool called the Test Combinations Generator."

"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."

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

"The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers."

"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."

"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."

More OpenText UFT One pros

"The way it identifies elements is 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."

"The performance and load testing are very good."

"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."

"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."

Cons

"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."

"The solution does not have proper scripting."

"There could be improvements in report export features similar to SmartBear."

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

"One area for improvement is its occasional slowness."

"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 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."

"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function."

More OpenText UFT One cons

"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."

"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."

"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."

"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""

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

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."

"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."

"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."

"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."

"The pricing of the product is an issue."

More OpenText UFT One pricing and cost advice

"The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten."

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

831,265 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

Computer Software Company

18%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Government

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

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...

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?

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 ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Telerik Test Studio?

The way it identifies elements is good.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Telerik Test Studio?

Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy. In addition, sometimes, tests used to fail intermittently. These were the two disadvantages.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Telerik Test Studio?

Instead of Telerik Test Studio, I'd recommend writing test cases in .Net so that in the future, if you move away from Telerik Test Studio to another tool, it would be easier for you. Your current c...

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 9% of the time

UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 9% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One

Compared 6% of the time

More OpenText UFT One Competitors

Selenium HQ vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 36% of the time

Katalon Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 17% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 16% of the time

Ranorex Studio vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 11% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Telerik Test Studio

Compared 10% of the time

More Telerik Test Studio Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One

January 2025

Download OpenText UFT One product report

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

January 2025

Download Telerik Test Studio product report

Also Known As

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

No data available

Learn More

OpenText

Progress Software

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

Telerik Test Studio is an innovative and easy-to-use automated web, WPF and load testing solution. Test Studio tests support essential technologies like ASP.NET AJAX, Silverlight, PHP and MVC. Test Studio functional testing is a comprehensive yet cost-effective automated testing suite. Users can complete tasks quickly and easily with the product's point-and-click interface, which is augmented by Telerik-exclusive features like a visual storyboard and 3D element selection. Test Studio also offers script-less test automation for Silverlight applications. Test Studio load tests allow users to capture quickly capture, multiply and replay complex web traffic. Record HTTP traffic from desktop browsers, mobile devices and web services, and replay traffic with hundreds or thousands of virtual users spread across multiple machines. Fine-tune your load scenario with data binding, user authentication, and dynamic targets. Test Studio Mobile is an intuitive and easy to use test automation solution for Mobile application testing. Create tests once and test across multiple devices and OS's. The point and click functionality allows users to capture quickly and replay complex mobile testing functionality. There is no need to write a single line of code. Test against any number of real devices as you wish or through an emulator by connecting through Wifi. Test Studio for APIs helps customers verify the integrity and reliability of their APIs in an easy way and incorporate their API testing effort in their continuous testing and delivery process. Test Studio for APIs is used to determine whether APIs return the correct response for a broad range of commonly accepted requests, react properly to edge cases such as failures and unexpected inputs, as well as deliver the responses in an acceptable amount of time.

Sample Customers

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

Fox, Chicco, BNP Paribas, eBay, Coca Cola, AT&T

Buyer's Guide

OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio

December 2024

Free Report: OpenText UFT One vs. Telerik Test Studio

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.