We performed a comparison between Automation Anywhere (AA) and OpenText UFT Developer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Robotic Process Automation (RPA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This product is easy to use, and it helps business users to more easily understand RPA."
"By using SNMP configurations and Excel, I was able to read the mail. I used this functionality to categorize the fabric, then I used this information to correlate the value to Jira along with Excel."
"In version 11.3, they have a good security option. Tool-wise, it's pretty good to work on Automation Anywhere. If you compare it to other tools in the industry. It is very user-friendly and easy to develop processes. We liking using it very much."
"The standout qualities of Automation Anywhere were the ease of automation and that it is an intuitive tool. After a simple walkthrough, a couple of hours or two, you would be able to hit the ground running."
"From the customer's perspective, the biggest benefits are automation of the security and monitoring systems."
"The ability to customize added automation to a lot of situations where human judgment and interpretation are not required."
"We have leveraged automation to increase economies of scale and value-added work while reducing operating costs."
"The Visual Studio integration is smooth and user-friendly."
"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."
"It is a product that can meet regulations of the banking industry."
"Integrates well with other products."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."
"The solution is very scalable."
"The most valuable feature for me is the number of protocols that can be tested. It not only tests Web, but also SAP, Siebel, .Net, and even pdf."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks."
"I would like to have the ability to schedule bots by whichever one is available."
"The process discovery side needs improvement."
"Companies need to better justify the ROI before usage - otherwise, they might spend money on things unnecessarily."
"The REST API could be improved."
"We have a challenge in our front office automation where capturing details from a table within a table does not happen in the existing AA Enterprise client version 11.3.4. The AA team tries various methods like using an Excel spreadsheet to capture the tables."
"They can further improve the AI. It is already at a certain level, but it can be improved."
"It would be really good if they could give more priority to tickets which are raised by partners. Right now, Automation Anywhere customers and employees have higher priority."
"One of the things that we did was purchase the solution originally through IBM, as they had an value-added layer on top of it. Once we had another group come on, they purchased additional bots directly from Automation Anywhere, and they wouldn't integrate well. We had to uninstall the solution that we had purchased from IBM and reinstall those bots to move forward."
"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."
"The tool could be a little easier."
"The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."
"UFT Developer is good, but it requires high-level development skills. Scripting is something that everybody should know to be able to work with this product. Currently, it is very development intensive, and you need to know various scripting languages. It would be good if the development effort could be cut short, and it can be scriptless like Tosca. It will help in more adoption because not every team has people with a software engineering background. If it is scriptless, the analysts who wear multiple hats and come from different backgrounds can also use it in a friendly manner. It is also quite expensive."
"The pricing could be improved."
Automation Anywhere (AA) is ranked 3rd in Robotic Process Automation (RPA) with 485 reviews while OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 16th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews. Automation Anywhere (AA) is rated 8.4, while OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Automation Anywhere (AA) writes "Automation Co-Pilot enables us to present details from CRM for business management on one page". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". Automation Anywhere (AA) is most compared with UiPath, Microsoft Power Automate, Blue Prism, IBM Robotic Process Automation (RPA) and Tricentis Tosca, whereas OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, froglogic Squish and Original Software TestDrive. See our Automation Anywhere (AA) vs. OpenText UFT Developer report.
We monitor all Robotic Process Automation (RPA) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
