We performed a comparison between Katalon Studio and OpenText UFT Developer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a good tool and provides all the essential features for our business requirements."
"It supports multiple easy-to-learn languages."
"The most valuable feature of Katalon Studio is the ease of use of the solution."
"The recording feature of this product is very valuable for our testing purposes."
"The best thing about the solution is that there is a record and playback functionality."
"Our clients have requested by all types of testing, including mobile, desktop, and API testing and all of those are covered by Katalon. I find that very valuable, very complete."
"The solution is easy to learn."
"This is a product that is well ahead of its immediate competition in features and functionality."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software."
"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
"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 recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."
"The solution is very scalable."
"The integration process with Jira should be enhanced and facilitated."
"Its stability needs improvement."
"Currently, I'm the only one who can use it because I have a Mac. It is giving a hard time to my team members who are on Linux. My team members are using Linux, and Katalon doesn't support Linux very well. It keeps on crashing. It crashes and shuts down almost every time they save their work, so they are not able to use it. It should have good support for Linux. We don't know what the problem is. If the Katalon team can pick up this issue, it will be very helpful."
"Object Spy is brittle. When I try to capture objects, I have to proceed multiple times before it works."
"We would like to see improved integration with various reporting tools; this would make our testing data more complete."
"We have been seeing some error pop-ups that are difficult to understand why they were triggered."
"One improvement would be if it could support more programming languages such as JavaScript or Python. Right now, it is only on Groovy, which I think is not a too popular language."
"Katalon doesn't support testing of hybrid applications. It's a limitation."
"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."
"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise."
"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."
"The pricing could be improved."
"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."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."
"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."
Katalon Studio is ranked 3rd in Test Automation Tools with 41 reviews while OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 14th in Test Automation Tools with 34 reviews. Katalon Studio is rated 7.8, while OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Katalon Studio writes "Useful multiple technology platform, scalable, but usability could improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". Katalon Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Postman, OpenText UFT One, Appium and Testim, whereas OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, froglogic Squish and Automai AppLoader. See our Katalon Studio vs. OpenText UFT Developer report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation Tools 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.
