We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One, Parasoft SOAtest, and ReadyAPI Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."
"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."
"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."
"Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"We can automate our scenarios in a data driven format, which shows there is no rework on scripts. We only need to update the test data and run for a number of scenarios."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"The solution is scalable."
"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."
"The solution scales well."
"The tool’s scalability is very good."
"The product allows us to uncover any potential issues early on."
"The out-of-the-box support for the database is a valuable feature."
"The utmost importance lies in the performance of the application."
"API mockups, functional testing, and load testing are valuable features."
"SoapUI Pro is a good tool when it comes to API design and orchestration. Additionally, it is beneficial for functional and for performance testing."
"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis."
"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."
"One thing that confused me, and now just mildly irritates me, is that we migrated from QuickTest Pro to HP UFT, Unified Functional Test. After we did the migration, it turned out that we didn't really have Unified Functional Test at all."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact."
"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"During the process of working with SOAtest and building test cases, the .TST files will grow. A negative side effect is that saving your changes takes more time."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"Enabling/disabling an optional element of an XML request is only possible if a data source (e.g., Excel sheet) is connected to the test. Otherwise, the option is not available at all in the drop-down menu."
"If the load and bare minimum could be defined, I would give this solution a higher rating."
"The current interface is unsatisfactory."
"I find that I'm fighting with the opportunities to order requests."
"The UI should be improved."
"SoapUI Pro is a little heavy due to the number of features. Previously it was not that heavy. Now the tool is too heavy, they should work on fixing this issue because until your system has lots of resources, you won't be able to use it seamlessly. The performance of the application itself could improve."
"The documentation needs to be improved because the interface is not easy for a first-time user."
"Grouping of the cases is not possible in SoapUI, to my knowledge. When working with critical cases or the, we were not able to group them properly. We can definitely create a suite and add them there, but within a whole suite, we have to identify them, which was not easy."
"Could integrate the graphing module for load testing."
