OpenText UFT One vs Ranorex Studio vs Zeenyx AscentialTest comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One, Ranorex Studio, 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: March 2024).
765,234 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
"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 most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation.""The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great.""The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good.""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.""The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner.""Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes.""​Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."

More OpenText UFT One Pros →

"I'm from a UFT background, so Ranorex Studio has a similar feel in terms of how it handles objects. It just felt familiar even though I'd never seen it before. However, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of UFT, but it's a pretty good start, and it's cost-effective.""Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity.""This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite.""Data security was prime for us. Being able to download and run tests on our local machines was a big plus. The flexibility Ranorex offers in terms of customization is outstanding.""The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market.""The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface.""I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy.""Object identification is good."

More Ranorex Studio Pros →

"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.""The most valuable feature of AscentialTest for us is that it fully supports PowerBuilder."

More Zeenyx AscentialTest Pros →

Cons
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected.""Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact.""Technical support could be improved.""They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user.""Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation).""The speed could be improved because a large test suite takes some time to execute.""I would like Micro Focus to provide more information on their portal about their newer products. The information about UFT One was outdated. The image recognition features could also be better.""I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."

More OpenText UFT One Cons →

"The object detection functionality needs to be improved.""There were a lot of issues we faced. One notable improvement would be better API integration within the tool itself, as we still rely on external tools like Postman.""One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian.""Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls).""Part of the challenge is that Ranorex's support is over in Europe, so we can't get responses on the same day. If we had support in the United States that was a bit more timely, that would be helpful.""If there are many queries on the web page, Ranorex will not render the page correctly. I had about 1,000 queries on the page, and the solution was not able to handle it.""For our purposes it requires integration with other products to get out the results in the format we want them. Adding this to the product could improve it.""The solution does not support dual or regression testing."

More Ranorex Studio Cons →

"Classes are not as object-oriented as I would like, but I am a programmer and not QA so I expect a lot.""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."

More Zeenyx AscentialTest Cons →

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 →

  • "We paid €3,000 (approximately $3,300 USD) for this solution. When you add the runtime licenses it will be €3,500 (approximately $3,900 USD)."
  • "The licensing fees depend on the number of users."
  • "There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."
  • "Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
  • "Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."
  • "This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."
  • More Ranorex Studio 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.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    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 »
    Top Answer:Data security was prime for us. Being able to download and run tests on our local machines was a big plus. The… more »
    Top Answer:I'd rate it around five out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, not too cheap but not overly pricey.
    Top Answer:There were a lot of issues we faced. One notable improvement would be better API integration within the tool itself, as… more »
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    2nd
    Views
    11,757
    Comparisons
    7,234
    Reviews
    20
    Average Words per Review
    694
    Rating
    7.9
    12th
    Views
    3,069
    Comparisons
    2,263
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    509
    Rating
    8.0
    34th
    Views
    368
    Comparisons
    172
    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
    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

    Ranorex is a leading software development company that offers innovative test automation software. Ranorex makes testing easy, saves time in the testing process and empowers clients to ensure the highest quality of their products. Its flexible tools and quick ROI make it the ideal choice for companies of virtually any size – and this is why thousands of clients in over 60 countries trust in its excellence.

    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
    Sage, JetBlue, Haufe.Group, Independent Health, Molina Healthcare, Cox Automotive, andTMNA Services
    Siemens, TomTom, Adidas, Canon, Lufthansa, Roche, Cisco, Philipps, Dell, Motorola, Toshiba, Citrix, Ericsson, sage, Continental, IBM, Credit Suisse, Vodafone
    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
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company16%
    Insurance Company10%
    Healthcare Company10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm19%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    Government7%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company26%
    Manufacturing Company17%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Government9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company24%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Government7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm22%
    Government15%
    Computer Software Company10%
    Energy/Utilities Company9%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise70%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise75%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business28%
    Midsize Enterprise26%
    Large Enterprise46%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business25%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise59%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business50%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise29%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise70%
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.