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."This is a product that is well ahead of its immediate competition in features and functionality."
"The initial setup of Katalon Studio was easy."
"It supports multiple easy-to-learn languages."
"The best thing about the solution is that there is a record and playback functionality."
"It is a good tool and provides all the essential features for our business requirements."
"The most valuable feature of Katalon Studio is that everything can be managed from one platform."
"One of the features that I like is Object Recognition. It worked very well, and it allowed me to create a dynamic expert based on my requirements."
"I personally like the 'Object Spy' feature of this tool. It makes it easy to find an element on the web page."
"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 recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."
"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."
"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."
"Katalon Studio should improve its usability, it still needs some improvement where users can easily use it to build their automation suite. It requires some initial work to set it up. There should be more keywords in the library to limit the coding requirements, this will allow a non-technical person easily start using it, which would be better."
"The tool's maintenance is very difficult since they do not follow call by value or call by reference. Due to this, any change happening is not reflected throughout all the test cases. There are some issues with data parameterization as well."
"Support options need improvement. It is sometimes hard to find a solution to any given problem, thus you are forced to use another solution."
"Katalon Studio's pricing is expensive."
"My recently-updated Katalon studio version hangs a lot and is not a stable version."
"Object Spy is brittle. When I try to capture objects, I have to proceed multiple times before it works."
"Katalon lacks integration with other software, including integrating other languages like .NET and PHP."
"The price of Katalon Studio is an area of concern where improvement is required."
"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."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."
"The support for .NET Framework and Visual Studio in Micro Focus UFT Developer is currently limited. At present, only Visual Studio 2019 is supported, despite the release of a newer version (2022). Similarly, the tool only supports up to .NET Framework version 4.3.8, while there have been six newer versions released. This is an area that could be improved upon, particularly in the Windows environment."
"The tool could be a little easier."
"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."
"The price of the solution could improve."
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.
