We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and Panaya Test Dynamix 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."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."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"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."
"I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"The solution has good out-of-the-box protocols."
"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."
"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
"Provides better monitoring for testing campaigns and business process testing."
"It is easy for business users to use who are not familiar with testing tools."
"Test migration from HPE are done automatically. We can extract our tests from HPE, and they convert it into the Panaya format."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to copy the scenarios and as we do a rollout we can efficiently complete test three and put it somewhere else under a new subsidiary."
"The initial setup was not complex and the product itself is very easy to configure and use."
"The test repository to follow the test progress is most valuable because we can easily create and manage a huge number of test scripts. We can copy and paste, replicate, and drag and drop many tests scripts. We can create test scripts en masse. When you have a high volume of tests, the tool is quite useful. It works well when you want to manage a lot of tests, such as you have 1,000 or more test scripts."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
"We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."
"They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"The speed could be improved because a large test suite takes some time to execute."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"It would be nice to be able to test offline. What I mean by that is today most of the time things are in the cloud, but sometimes when we are in factories and we do not have network access and we should be able to download a test script into our PCs and do the test offline. Once that is complete we can re-upload it when we have a network connection."
"The setup of Panaya Recorder is a bit complex. Panaya is a SaaS application, but you need to install some components on your computer. You need to set up your computer to allow Panaya Recorder to work. There are five or six things to do each time you install Panaya for any user. If you miss something, Panaya Recorder doesn't work. So, it is complex to install."
"They provide options for custom fields or tabs, but customization of workflows would be great."
"Support is reactive and in English only."
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews while Panaya Test Dynamix is ranked 23rd in Functional Testing Tools with 4 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while Panaya Test Dynamix is rated 8.6. 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 Panaya Test Dynamix writes "More than reliable, with satisfied results for our needs, and excellent testing options". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite, whereas Panaya Test Dynamix is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Tricentis qTest, Worksoft Certify, OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Selenium HQ. See our OpenText UFT One vs. Panaya Test Dynamix 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.