We performed a comparison between Katalon Studio and OpenText UFT Developer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The scalability of the product is good."
"One of the features that I like is Object Recognition. It worked very well, and it allowed me to create a dynamic expert based on my requirements."
"Our clients have requested by all types of testing, including mobile, desktop, and API testing and all of those are covered by Katalon. I find that very valuable, very complete."
"The most valuable feature of Katalon Studio is that everything can be managed from one platform."
"The product provides ease of automation for the cloud."
"The recording feature of this product is very valuable for our testing purposes."
"It is a good tool and provides all the essential features for our business requirements."
"The most valuable features of Katalon Studio are its user-friendliness and the AI smart healing capabilities."
"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."
"One of the important features, which speeds up the automation testing development with LeanFT, is its object repository functions. Object identification are the most time-consuming aspect of building automation tests. LeanFT gives that out of the box. It helps you identify the objects and after that, once you got the object in place, then it's just about building the test scripts. So it reduces your development time significantly."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"There is not much support offered for the free version, which is something that could be improved."
"My recently-updated Katalon studio version hangs a lot and is not a stable version."
"We would like to see improved integration with various reporting tools; this would make our testing data more complete."
"Support options need improvement. It is sometimes hard to find a solution to any given problem, thus you are forced to use another solution."
"Katalon doesn't support testing of hybrid applications. It's a limitation."
"They need to work on documentation to make it more centralized and easier to find what you are looking for."
"It seems to lack a few requirements that a typical customer would want. Compared to other solutions, this product is lacking."
"Katalon lacks integration with other software, including integrating other languages like .NET and PHP."
"The pricing could be improved."
"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."
"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."
"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."
"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."
"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."
Katalon Studio is ranked 3rd in Test Automation Tools with 42 reviews while OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 14th in Test Automation Tools with 34 reviews. Katalon Studio is rated 7.8, while OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Katalon Studio writes " Functional automation features and the recording functionality saves time but the performance and script execution is slow ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". Katalon Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Postman, OpenText UFT One, Testim and Appium, whereas OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, Original Software TestDrive and froglogic Squish. See our Katalon Studio vs. OpenText UFT Developer report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.
