ACCELQ Automate vs OpenText UFT Developer comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
ACCELQ Logo
975 views|798 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
OpenText Logo
2,854 views|1,748 comparisons
77% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between ACCELQ Automate and OpenText UFT Developer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Test Automation Tools Report (Updated: May 2024).
772,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The platform contributes to faster test release cycles."

More ACCELQ Automate Pros →

"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local.""The solution is very scalable.""One of the important features, which speeds up the automation testing development with LeanFT, is its object repository functions. Object identification are the most time-consuming aspect of building automation tests. LeanFT gives that out of the box. It helps you identify the objects and after that, once you got the object in place, then it's just about building the test scripts. So it reduces your development time significantly.""It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good.""The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency.""Integrates well with other products.""It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE.""One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."

More OpenText UFT Developer Pros →

Cons
"The platform's reporting aspects can be broader and include more granular details."

More ACCELQ Automate Cons →

"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars.""The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added.""It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding.""It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute.""It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support.""In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure.""The price of the solution could improve.""The support for .NET Framework and Visual Studio in Micro Focus UFT Developer is currently limited. At present, only Visual Studio 2019 is supported, despite the release of a newer version (2022). Similarly, the tool only supports up to .NET Framework version 4.3.8, while there have been six newer versions released. This is an area that could be improved upon, particularly in the Windows environment."

More OpenText UFT Developer Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "I rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. It can be optimized."
  • More ACCELQ Automate Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
  • "The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
  • "The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
  • "When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."
  • "It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
  • "The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
  • "Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."
  • "The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
  • More OpenText UFT Developer Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Automation Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    772,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The platform contributes to faster test release cycles.
    Top Answer:I rate the product's pricing an eight out of ten. It can be optimized.
    Top Answer:The platform's reporting aspects can be broader and include more granular details. Additionally, there could be a capability to automatically generate automation scripts extracting the user data from… more »
    Top Answer:There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership.
    Top Answer:The pricing is competitive. It is affordable and average.
    Top Answer:Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars.
    Ranking
    19th
    Views
    975
    Comparisons
    798
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    427
    Rating
    9.0
    14th
    Views
    2,854
    Comparisons
    1,748
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    452
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
    Learn More
    Overview

    The most powerful test automation tool for web, desktop, mainframes and more.

    With OpenText UFT Developer, you get object identification tools, parallel testing, and record/replay capabilities.
    Sample Customers
    FISCHER, optanix, ERICSSON, BenifitMall, QuickPivot, DIGITALFUEL, westcreek
    Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Healthcare Company16%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Comms Service Provider12%
    Manufacturing Company12%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm22%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Energy/Utilities Company7%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise69%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business5%
    Midsize Enterprise24%
    Large Enterprise71%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise76%
    Buyer's Guide
    Test Automation Tools
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools. Updated: May 2024.
    772,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    ACCELQ Automate is ranked 19th in Test Automation Tools with 1 review while OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 14th in Test Automation Tools with 34 reviews. ACCELQ Automate is rated 9.0, while OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of ACCELQ Automate writes "Provides good stability and a valuable object identification feature ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". ACCELQ Automate is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Eggplant Test, Functionize and SmartBear TestComplete, whereas OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, Original Software TestDrive and Selenium HQ.

    See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.

    We monitor all Test Automation 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.