We performed a comparison between LambdaTest and OpenText UFT One 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."It's user-friendly and offers valuable features for testing, making it a reliable tool."
"LambdaTest is easy to use, and the documentation provides all the needed information."
"We use the solution for automation testing and monitoring."
"The most valuable feature is the real-time testing, which helps you to test your website on more than two thousand combinations of browsers and operating systems."
"Builds that took days to complete with in-house infrastructure were executed in a couple of hours."
"Geolocation testing is as straightforward as ticking checkboxes of browsers, operating systems, and countries."
"The Docker tunnel integration for local testing can be extremely useful to run on multiple instances in parallel."
"It is a scalable solution."
"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."
"The stop automation is a great feature."
"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."
"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
"It offers a wide range of testing."
"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"Mobile application testing would be helpful for us."
"It would be nice to have an API for visual regression testing."
"Responsive testing UI is a bit cluttered, whereas the LT browser is much better to use."
"The scalability is good with Amazon, but IBM had some issues."
"Mobile application testing will be an added benefit for us if LambdaTest implements this really soon."
"Load flow compared to other stacks needs improvement."
"Sometimes, when multiple users use the tool simultaneously, it can slow down, affecting efficiency."
"I didn't like the solution's technical support and how they communicated and tried to fix the issues of customers like me."
"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."
"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."
"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."
"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."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
"I am not sure if they have a vision of how they want to position the leads in the market, because if you look at Tosca, Tosca is one of the automation tools that have a strategy, and it recently updated its strategy with SAP. They are positioning them as a type of continuous testing automation tool. And if you notice Worksoft, particularly the one tool for your enterprise application, your Worksoft is positioning. I am not sure if Micro Focus UFT has a solid strategy in place. They must differentiate themselves so that people recognize Micro Focus UFT for that reason."
"The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails."
LambdaTest is ranked 14th in Functional Testing Tools with 21 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews. LambdaTest is rated 8.8, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of LambdaTest writes "Technical support should be improved, though it has great documentation". 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". LambdaTest is most compared with BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio and Perfecto, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite. See our LambdaTest vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation 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.