We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and Oracle Application Testing Suite 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."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."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."
"The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."
"One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA."
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."
"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"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."
"You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
More Oracle Application Testing Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews while Oracle Application Testing Suite is ranked 13th in Functional Testing Tools with 24 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while Oracle Application Testing Suite 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 Oracle Application Testing Suite writes "Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and OpenText UFT Digital Lab, whereas Oracle Application Testing Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and Tricentis NeoLoad. See our OpenText UFT One vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite 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.