BrowserStack vs OpenText UFT One vs Zeenyx AscentialTest comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
BrowserStack Logo
8,712 views|6,797 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
OpenText Logo
11,332 views|6,976 comparisons
87% willing to recommend
Zeenyx Logo
364 views|169 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between BrowserStack, OpenText UFT One, and Zeenyx AscentialTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: April 2024).
767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from.""We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices.""The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market.""BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile.""The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices.""The most valuable features are the variety of tools available.""The most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously.""The integration is very good."

More BrowserStack Pros →

"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources.""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.""The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP).""For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process.""The stop automation is a great feature.""The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent.""One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA.""We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."

More OpenText UFT One Pros →

"The most valuable feature of AscentialTest for us is that it fully supports PowerBuilder.""If you use the PowerBuilder application, do choose AscentialTest without thinking twice.""It’s been really easy to automate the same application TestComplete struggled with. I have been able to automate two of our key applications in just a few months. I haven’t even taken their training.""AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows."

More Zeenyx AscentialTest Pros →

Cons
"There is room for improvement in pricing.""It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience.""BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally.""We had some execution issues.""I would like to see clearer visibility.""Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product.""The solution is slow.""BrowserStack is scalable, but cost is significant for those living in Mexico."

More BrowserStack Cons →

"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this.""The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile.""The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients.""The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features.""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.""UFT has a recording feature. They could make the recording feature window bigger for whatever activities that I am recording. It would improve the user experience if they could create a separate floating panel (or have it automatically show on the side) once the recording starts.""The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script.""It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."

More OpenText UFT One Cons →

"Streamlining the retrieval of results from individual test set runs would be beneficial.""I would like to see an improvement in the User Interface.""The only thing I can't wait for is for Zeenyx to add automating Mobile apps.""Classes are not as object-oriented as I would like, but I am a programmer and not QA so I expect a lot."

More Zeenyx AscentialTest Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "This solution costs less than competing products."
  • "The price is fine."
  • "There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
  • "BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
  • "The price of BrowserStack is high."
  • "Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
  • "My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
  • "As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
  • More BrowserStack Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."
  • "The licensing and pricing model is confusing."
  • "It's an expensive solution."
  • "For the price of five automation licenses, you simply would not be able to hire five manual testers for two years worth of 24/7 manual testing work on demand."
  • "The price is only $3,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company. Probably no more than five or 10. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't see that being an issue."
  • "The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""
  • "The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."
  • "The price is one aspect that could be improved."
  • More OpenText UFT One Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Once it starts generating ROI, which for us took between three and six months, one will not even think about the investment."
  • More Zeenyx AscentialTest Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:With respect to pricing, they are a bit expensive. I would rate the licensing model a six out of ten, where one is… more »
    Top Answer:The issue with the product stems from the fact that when we try to do a single or multiple login on multiple browsers… more »
    Top Answer:We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing MicroFocus… more »
    Top Answer:My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years.
    Top Answer:The product wasn't easy for developers to learn and pick up in the area revolving around scripting for automation, and… more »
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    5th
    Views
    8,712
    Comparisons
    6,797
    Reviews
    12
    Average Words per Review
    353
    Rating
    7.9
    2nd
    Views
    11,332
    Comparisons
    6,976
    Reviews
    20
    Average Words per Review
    694
    Rating
    7.9
    34th
    Views
    364
    Comparisons
    169
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus UFT One, UFT (QTP), Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP)
    AscentialTest
    Learn More
    Zeenyx
    Video Not Available
    Overview
    BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.
    Our AI-powered functional testing tool accelerates test automation. It works across desktop, web, mobile, mainframe, composite, and packaged enterprise-grade applications. Read white paper
    AscentialTest™ by Zeenyx Software is an enterprise level Test Management System that encompasses Test Planning, Development, Data Management, Execution and Defect Tracking for applications running on Windows, the web, java, dotNet, terminals and PowerBuilder. This “next generation” testing solution allows users to build robust automated and manual tests from reusable components created by its powerful object recognition engine without recording or scripting. Our patented ‘snapshot’ technology generates graphical representations of the application under test which allows users to build ‘Steps’ by dragging and dropping objects in a visual test editor. Reusable Steps are combined to form a multitude of automated and manual tests that are easy to create and maintain. With AscentialTest, companies realize a dramatic reduction in test creation and maintenance times, resulting in increased productivity and lower costs.
    Sample Customers
    Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
    Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
    TJX Companies, Nuance Communications, Ericsson Inc., Transatlantic Reinsurance Company, Accenture, Nutrition Coordinating Center, Univ. of MN, iConectiv, Fortress Software, and LMP Corp.
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company55%
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Marketing Services Firm9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Retailer7%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company16%
    Insurance Company10%
    Healthcare Company10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm19%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    Government7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm23%
    Government16%
    Energy/Utilities Company11%
    Computer Software Company8%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business30%
    Midsize Enterprise26%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise67%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise70%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise75%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business50%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise29%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise71%
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    April 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: April 2024.
    767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.