We performed a comparison between Eggplant Performance and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."We find the solution stable and scalable."
"We don't have a big team of people that can watch the dials and check that everything is okay. We're doing a lot of the monitoring of our website and our product at the side of the desk. We need a solution that does a lot for us, and that's what Eggplant does."
"It is not a conventional test automation tool. It uses optical character recognition (OCR) to identify objects. It makes it the best in the class."
"The stop automation is a great feature."
"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."
"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"Performance is one key area for improvement. It can be slower compared to other tools I've used."
"I'd like to see the ability to integrate the user experience through device forms like AWS device forms or source labs."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"The scripting language could be improved. They're currently using Visual Basic, but I think that people need something more advanced, like Python or Java."
"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."
"There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"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."
Eggplant Performance is ranked 15th in Performance Testing Tools with 4 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews. Eggplant Performance is rated 7.8, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Eggplant Performance writes "Offers unique object identification, ideal for UI layer regression automation but limited scalability". On the other hand, 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". Eggplant Performance is most compared with Appium, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter and Tricentis Tosca, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite.
We monitor all Performance 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.