We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and ReadyAPI based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"The solution is easy to integrate with other platforms."
"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."
"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."
"I haven't seen any other tool that offers both types of tests. This is very helpful for us, and it's one of the main reasons why we chose this service."
"The most valuable features are the integration with Jira and the test management tools."
"ReadyAPI's best features are user-friendliness, smooth integration with Postman, the speed of creating test cases, and integration with customer data."
"The feature that allows you to import an API collection or a project is valuable."
"ReadyAPI's best features are that it's user-friendly and its behavior-driven development is flexible."
"For anyone who does not have experience with automation, ReadyAPI provides a sense of comfort, especially for testers who find it hard to go directly into coding."
"The two most valuable features we use are the functional test and the security test."
"The most valuable feature of ReadyAPI is that it is user-friendly."
"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis."
"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."
"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."
"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 solution is expensive."
"I would like Micro Focus to provide more information on their portal about their newer products. The information about UFT One was outdated. The image recognition features could also be better."
"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."
"The reporting in ReadyAPI could be better. It can become sloppy, sometimes it works and other times it does not."
"The UI should be flexible. Currently, the UI isn't."
"If ReadyAPI had more integration with all of the big tools on the market then this would be very useful."
"Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions."
"I would like to see a better dashboard for monitoring in the next release of this solution."
"It doesn't have connectors to the NoSQL database. This is one of the things where they do not have a very solid strategy today. Other solutions have an in-built mechanism where I can directly and easily connect. An API is more around a user submitting a request on the frontend. It then hits the backend, puts the data, and responds back. If I am hitting MongoDB or NoSQL databases, I do not have ready-made inbuilt solutions in ReadyAPI that can easily help me in automating it faster. In our organization, we deal with NoSQL databases, and therefore, we need Groovy. We just cannot have a connector from ReadyAPI to do that. I have to write Groovy scripts. If you have themes that are predominantly using MongoDB, it leads to more maintenance and support activity because we are introducing more code into our commission. In terms of additional features, it can have cloud support. This is one of the things where we are getting into cloud support. We'll see how it works, but it is one of the doubts that we still have."
"The content on ReadyAPI in SmartBear Academy is outdated."
"ReadyAPI's customer support isn't that great, particularly their response time."
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews while ReadyAPI is ranked 7th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while ReadyAPI is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReadyAPI writes "Allows you to parameterize in one place for the changes to reflect everywhere and lets you customize the environment, but its load testing feature needs improvement, and costs need to be cheaper". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite, whereas ReadyAPI is most compared with Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, ReadyAPI Test and SmartBear TestComplete. See our OpenText UFT One vs. ReadyAPI report.
See our list of best Functional 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.
