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

OpenText UFT One vs Tricentis Tosca 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.5
OpenText UFT One enhances efficiency and productivity with automation, AI capabilities, and supports achieving up to 300% ROI.
Sentiment score
7.1
Tricentis Tosca significantly reduced tests, boosted ROI, enhanced efficiency, yet smaller companies found it costly compared to local options.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText UFT One's customer service is generally efficient but inconsistent, with varied experiences in support quality and response time.
Sentiment score
6.8
Tricentis Tosca support is generally responsive and helpful, but some users experience delays and desire improved efficiency.
After creating a ticket, it takes three to five days for them to acknowledge it and then send it to somebody.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
There is no way to mark the importance or criticality of incidents when creating them.
Response through chat has been replaced by chatbots, which has impacted the experience.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText UFT One is scalable, integrating with Jenkins, but success depends on licensing, automation quality, and deployment strategy.
Sentiment score
7.3
Tricentis Tosca is highly scalable, adaptable for extensive testing, praised for end-to-end automation and suitable for large enterprises.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.6
OpenText UFT One generally exhibits stability, though some users report performance issues, often resolved through updates. Satisfaction remains high.
Sentiment score
7.4
Tricentis Tosca is reliable but can face performance issues with large projects, network instability, and licensing challenges.
I find stability issues when using the Vision AI feature; Tricentis Tosca is not very stable.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText UFT One requires improvements in stability, compatibility, speed, memory use, object recognition, and integration with open-source tools.
Tricentis Tosca needs improvements in usability, cost, test features, integration, and ease of learning for new users.
If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
Moving to a cloud-based application rather than a desktop one could improve Tosca.
The Vision AI implementation works very slowly, affecting the speed of our work.
 

Setup Cost

OpenText UFT One licensing is costly, leading organizations to mix different license types and evaluate ROI against open-source alternatives.
Tricentis Tosca is costly for SMEs, with annual licenses up to Є20,000, but deals are possible for large enterprises.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
A yearly license costs around 20,000 euros.
For enterprise customers, the cost is manageable because it provides solutions for multiple applications they want to automate.
 

Valuable Features

OpenText UFT One provides versatile automation with cross-platform compatibility, easy use, robust testing, and integration with key technologies.
Tricentis Tosca provides user-friendly, scriptless test automation with model-based testing, handling complex scenarios for efficient, flexible testing.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
The OpenText solution is the best of breed and the best solution on the market for large customers.
The most useful features of Tricentis Tosca include API scanning, basic web application automation, and data validation capabilities.
It allows for drag-and-drop functionality and demo automation in SAP-based applications, which can be challenging with other automation tools.
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT One
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
2nd
Ranking in API Testing Tools
4th
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
95
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tricentis Tosca
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in Mobile App Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in Regression Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in API Testing Tools
1st
Ranking in Test Automation Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
109
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 Tricentis Tosca is 19.5%, up from 15.2% 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.
Antonio Oteri - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to automate tests across various platforms and simplifies test creation
From what I've seen with my colleagues who make the software selection, the prices for this software in Brazil are too expensive to be applied to anything but huge customers. I'm surprised because I was in charge of planning and control at the company before, when there was a manager there. Normally, the company has structural licenses that are based on the company they are selling to. I see that these companies cannot spend this money on Tricentis. I think Tosca is losing this type of market. They should have a different license policy for medium and small companies. The same happened in the past with SAP, which changed its policy and also made licenses for low.
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.
 

Answers from the Community

NC
Nov 11, 2022
Nov 11, 2022
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 suited for CI integrations. We liked it, in particular, because it integrates greatly with other platforms, like .net, QC and Jenkins. An added advantage was the multi-device support. One of the bes...
See 2 answers
Nov 2, 2021
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 suited for CI integrations. We liked it, in particular, because it integrates greatly with other platforms, like .net, QC and Jenkins. An added advantage was the multi-device support. One of the best advantages of MicroFocus is that it integrates with legacy web technologies and even Windows client applications. Finally, MicroFocus supports cross-browser testing. Regardless of many features, including a test combinations generator and insight recording, it is relatively easy to learn. That being said, it doesn’t support multiple formats of reporting. For now, UFT only supports exporting reports in HTML or PDF. MicroFocus should allow exporting to Excel, CSV, XML, and other formats. There is a bit of performance degradation of the test environment when executing automation scripts continuously for a long time. The execution can be inconsistent sometimes, and scripting takes a long time. Another downside is the high licensing price. Tricentis Tosca is an integrated testing solution that includes testing automation and case design approach, risk-based testing, test data management, and service virtualization. The best feature is its versatility in helping both web and desktop applications. It is very reliable and stable. Another great feature is that you can reuse test cases. The platform supports multiple technologies and devices. It is truly end-to-end. Because it is scriptless, anyone can learn to use it. As much as we like it, there are downsides to Tosca, too. The price is one of them. It runs a bit expensive, but it is worth it. The test design section is complicated to learn, and the UI takes time to get used to. Conclusions Tosca is a better solution in terms of usability and versatility. MicroFocus is better for organizations with legacy web applications.
Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Nov 11, 2022
Both products are very useful but it really depends on what you need to test and who is building the tests.  We recently chose UFT One over Tosca in a specific use case where identifying images inside a map was needed.  UFT uses both OCR and Image recognition where in Tosca you would have to identify specific pixels and those pixels could move depending on what device you were using.   From a test building perspective, I feel it is easier to build tests in UFT One than in Tosca.  UFT One also gives you the ability to develop tests by either writing code or using the record and convert to code option (Allows developers and Business users to work together to build/update the same test).   If you can provide more info on what you are testing and your key drivers, I can try and give more info on what tool may be best.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Insurance Company
6%
 

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 does Tricentis Tosca compare with Worksoft Certify?
Tosca fulfills our business needs better because it is an end-to-end solution across technologies. We like that it is scriptless, so even non-experienced staff can use it. To put it simply, with To...
What do you like most about Tricentis Tosca?
For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Tricentis Tosca?
Tricentis Tosca is quite expensive. A yearly license costs around 20,000 euros, compared to TestComplete, which is about 5,000 to 8,000 euros.
 

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
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
HBO, AMEX, BMW Group, ING, Bosch, Austrian Airlines, Deutsche Bank, Henkel, Allianz, Bank of America, UBS, Orange, Siemens, Swiss Re, Vodafone
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. Tricentis Tosca and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.