We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One, ReadyAPI, and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."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."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"Hidden among the kitchen sink of features is a new Data Generation tool called the Test Combinations Generator."
"On a scale of one to ten, I would give OpenText UFT One a 10 because it is a reliable product, it works, it's as good or better than similar solutions especially because you get technical support from real people. Additionally, upgrades are always provided on a consistent basis."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"The most valuable feature for me is that it works on multiple platforms and technologies."
"The Excel sheet feature is good."
"ReadyAPI's best features are user-friendliness, smooth integration with Postman, the speed of creating test cases, and integration with customer data."
"The great thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a wide variety of functions. You can test any API that you come across. You are not limited to one type of API. It supports many APIs."
"The most valuable features of ReadyAPI are the ready-to-use assertions and filters which can perform the validation. If we want to filter out any value, the filters are available. Apart from that database integration, if you want to go ahead and perform validation in the database layer it is possible with the ready-to-use feature available. The execution and reporting are rich features."
"It's great for those that don't have as much exposure to programming."
"When we are doing API testing we have found it to be very efficient to receive results. Additionally, you are able to do tests directly from the API."
"The initial setup of ReadyAPI is straightforward."
"I haven't seen any other tool that offers both types of tests. This is very helpful for us, and it's one of the main reasons why we chose this service."
"Some of the most valuable features of this solution are open-source, they have good support, good community support, and it supports multiple languages whether you use C-Sharp or not. These are some of the most important benefits."
"The ability to present your tests on a wiki page and hooking them up to the scripts/fixtures."
"Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well."
"Ability to integrate with every other tool."
"The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing."
"It's easy for new people to get trained on this solution. If we are hiring new people, the resource pool in the market in test automation is largely around Selenium."
"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."
"I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps."
"There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT."
"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"The solution does not have proper scripting."
"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."
"Version control does not work well."
"They have performance testing also. However, it's not that great."
"It is challenging doing upgrades and patches because sometimes the environmental variables or suits in the projects get erased."
"I would like to see a better dashboard for monitoring in the next release of this solution."
"The UI should be flexible. Currently, the UI isn't."
"I don't like how they don't have a clear way to manage tests between multiple projects."
"There is a lot of room for improvement, mainly from the point of view of integrating ReadyAPI into the CI pipelines, and also the scripting aspect into Bitbucket."
"What needs improvement in ReadyAPI is its load testing feature because there was a hiccup when my team performed some load testing on the tool. My team had meetings with the ReadyAPI team and tried to get that issue fixed, but it still hasn't improved. This is a shortcoming of the tool, especially when you compare it with HP LoadRunner."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely."
"Selenium is good when the team is really technical because Selenium does less built-in methods. If it came with more built-in and pre-built methods it would be even easier for less technical people to work with it. That's where I think the improvement can be."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
"For email-based applications, we can't automate as we would like to, making it necessary to bring in a third-party product to do so."
"It would be awesome if there was a standalone implementation of Selenium for non-developer users."
"I have found that at times the tool does not catch the class features of website content correctly. The product's AWS configuration is also hard."
