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

OpenText UFT One vs Visual Studio Test Professional comparison

OpenText and Microsoft are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. OpenText is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.2, while Microsoft is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.5. OpenText holds a 9.9% mindshare in FT, compared to Microsoft’s 0.6% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of OpenText users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Microsoft 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
Visual Studio Test Professi...
Read 51 Visual Studio Test Professional reviews
  • 513 Views
  • 442 Comparison Views
96% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

OpenText UFT One and Visual Studio Test Professional compete in automated testing. Visual Studio Test Professional has the upper hand for its integration with Microsoft tools, accessible pricing, and diverse functionality.

Features: OpenText UFT One offers browser support, allows Excel data import, and recognizes HTML5 objects for broad environment operation without pre-compilation. Visual Studio Test Professional provides integration with .NET projects, a rich IDE, and features like IntelliSense and ReSharper.

Room for Improvement: UFT One could improve in stability, browser compatibility, and memory use, as well as enhance language support and cost structure. Visual Studio Test Professional could improve integration with modern tools, reduce memory consumption, and enhance code compatibility across updates.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both products offer deployment flexibility on-premises and in the cloud. UFT One is known for responsive support, though feedback varies. Visual Studio Test Professional benefits from strong Microsoft ecosystem integration but has occasional slower support responses.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT One is expensive but effective for large enterprises, offering ROI through automation capabilities. Visual Studio Test Professional is perceived as priced high by some but offers a community edition that provides a cost-effective entry point.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed OpenText UFT One vs. Visual Studio Test Professional Report (Updated: January 2025).
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One vs. Visual Studio Test Professional
January 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 831,158 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:
 

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
7.3
Visual Studio Test Professional boosts efficiency and reduces development time, enhancing ROI, though effectiveness varies by company needs.
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.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the Visual Studio Test Professional report
Badari Mallireddy - PeerSpot reviewer
AG
Pierre CAHAY - PeerSpot reviewer
 

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
7.1
Visual Studio Test Professional's customer service is effective but can improve, with community support supplementing Microsoft's varied response times.
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.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
Sometimes, the documentation is not readable, being too long or too detailed and not connected to my problem.
For more quotes and insights, download the Visual Studio Test Professional report
Badari Mallireddy - PeerSpot reviewer
AG
Pierre CAHAY - PeerSpot reviewerCharlesChang - PeerSpot reviewer
 

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
7.5
Visual Studio Test Professional is praised for scalability, supporting various team sizes and extensive projects despite licensing cost concerns.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
No quotes available
For more quotes and insights, download the Visual Studio Test Professional report
 

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
7.9
Users generally find Visual Studio Test Professional stable and reliable, though occasional slowdowns or crashes may occur with third-party systems.
 

Room For Improvement

OpenText UFT One requires improvements in stability, compatibility, speed, memory use, object recognition, and integration with open-source tools.
Visual Studio Test Professional needs improvements in usability, performance, affordability, and features like automation, platform support, and cloud integration.
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.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
Sometimes, the library version is not compatible with other libraries, causing errors in my application.
The Git extensions are very basic and can be more extensive compared to other software focused on Git, like GitTower or SmartGit.
For more quotes and insights, download the Visual Studio Test Professional report
Badari Mallireddy - PeerSpot reviewer
AG
CharlesChang - PeerSpot reviewerVaibhav Kaneria - PeerSpot reviewer
 

Setup Cost

OpenText UFT One licensing is costly, leading organizations to mix different license types and evaluate ROI against open-source alternatives.
Visual Studio Test Professional offers value with extensive features, despite being costly at $52 monthly or $1,300 annually.
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.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
The price is expensive.
For more quotes and insights, download the Visual Studio Test Professional report
Pierre CAHAY - PeerSpot reviewer
AG
Badari Mallireddy - PeerSpot reviewerCharlesChang - PeerSpot reviewer
 

Valuable Features

OpenText UFT One provides versatile automation with cross-platform compatibility, easy use, robust testing, and integration with key technologies.
Visual Studio Test Professional is valued for its user-friendly interface, extensive features, and seamless integration with Microsoft tools.
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.
For more quotes and insights, download the OpenText UFT One report
It supports cross-platform functionality.
For more quotes and insights, download the Visual Studio Test Professional report
Badari Mallireddy - PeerSpot reviewer
AG
Pierre CAHAY - PeerSpot reviewerCharlesChang - PeerSpot reviewer
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText UFT One
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
95
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (2nd), Regression Testing Tools (2nd), API Testing Tools (4th), Test Automation Tools (2nd)
Visual Studio Test Professi...
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
Test Management Tools (5th)
 

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 Visual Studio Test Professional is 0.6%, down from 1.0% 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.
Read full review
CharlesChang - PeerSpot reviewer
Valuable performance and libraries but needs compatibility improvements
We use Visual Studio Test Professional to develop our internal applications for our company The performance of Visual Studio Test Professional is valuable. Additionally, there are many libraries that I can use, and it supports cross-platform functionality. Visual Studio Test Professional is…
Read full review
report
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
831,158 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%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
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...
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 Visual Studio Test Professional?
The most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and availability.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Visual Studio Test Professional?
The tool is free, resulting in no costs associated with its use. The absence of price makes it cost-effective.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Visual Studio Test Professional?
There are not any specific areas for improvement since there are so many libraries and frameworks already available, and we have not even touched everything yet.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One Logo
Tricentis Tosca vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 31% of the time
OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One Logo
OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 11% of the time
Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One Logo
Katalon Studio vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 9% of the time
UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One Logo
UiPath Test Suite vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 9% of the time
SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One Logo
SmartBear TestComplete vs OpenText UFT One
Compared 6% of the time
More OpenText UFT One Competitors
Apache JMeter vs Visual Studio Test Professional Logo
Apache JMeter vs Visual Studio Test Professional
Compared 25% of the time
SmartBear TestComplete vs Visual Studio Test Professional Logo
SmartBear TestComplete vs Visual Studio Test Professional
Compared 19% of the time
TFS vs Visual Studio Test Professional Logo
TFS vs Visual Studio Test Professional
Compared 18% of the time
Qt Squish vs Visual Studio Test Professional Logo
Qt Squish vs Visual Studio Test Professional
Compared 13% of the time
Telerik Test Studio vs Visual Studio Test Professional Logo
Telerik Test Studio vs Visual Studio Test Professional
Compared 13% of the time
More Visual Studio Test Professional Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One
January 2025
OpenText UFT One reportDownload OpenText UFT One product report
Buyer's Guide
Visual Studio Test Professional
December 2024
Visual Studio Test Professional reportDownload Visual Studio Test Professional 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
Microsoft
 

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
Visual Studio Professional Edition provides an IDE for all supported development languages. As of Visual Studio 2010, the Standard edition was dropped. MSDN support is available as MSDN Essentials or the full MSDN library depending on licensing. It supports XML and XSLT editing, and can create deployment packages that only use ClickOnce and MSI. It includes tools like Server Explorer and integration with Microsoft SQL Server also. Windows Mobile development support was included in Visual Studio 2005 Standard, however, with Visual Studio 2008, it is only available in Professional and higher editions. Windows Phone 7 development support was added to all editions in Visual Studio 2010. Development for Windows Mobile is no longer supported in Visual Studio 2010; it is superseded by Windows Phone 7.
 

Sample Customers

Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
Transport for Greater Manchester, Ordina, Bluegarden A/S, CLEAResult, Jet.com, OSIsoft, Australian Taxation Office, BookedOut, Tracasa
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One vs. Visual Studio Test Professional
January 2025
Free Report: OpenText UFT One vs. Visual Studio Test Professional
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText UFT One vs. Visual Studio Test Professional and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our OpenText UFT One vs. Visual Studio Test Professional report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing 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.