We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One, SmartBear TestComplete, and Telerik Test Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools."Has improved our organization by allowing us to obtain fast, detailed information about the behavior of our products and to supply this to the customer, enabling us to work together without the need for special programming knowledge."
"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."
"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"It is a stable solution."
"I like the cross browser compatibility. It saves a lot of time re-writing scripts to accommodate different browsers."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."
"It allows us to test both desktop and web applications."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps."
"The initial setup is pretty easy and it's quick to deploy."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is regression testing tools."
"Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"The way it identifies elements is good."
"The performance and load testing are very good."
"Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"Technical support could be improved."
"The solution does not have proper scripting."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"The product wasn't easy for developers to learn and pick up in the area revolving around scripting for automation, and there was a lot of resistance from developers, causing my company to rely on specialist resources."
"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."
"The initial setup of SmartBear TestComplete was complex."
"This solution could be improved by making it easier to visualize where there is a failure without having to look at it in detail."
"It is very hard to read the test log generated by TestComplete Executor if the log file is very big. TestComplete Executor is a small tool for just running the TestComplete test framework (not for developing)."
"In SmartBear TestComplete the integration with Jenkins could be easier. Additionally, some of the controls could have better customization options. For example, if a grid is used and it contains multiple controls within it, it can be a checkbox, radio button, or any kind of control, the way the Object Spy is operating currently there is a lot of room for improvement."
"Right now, the product only supports Windows."
"What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing."
"During the distribution of our regression test cases, the control IDs are not always recognized correctly."
"Increased performance with less memory and CPU usage."
"Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy."
"I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding."
"There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test."
"The charts need to be more detailed and customizable."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
