LambdaTest vs OpenText UFT Developer comparison

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

We performed a comparison between LambdaTest and OpenText UFT Developer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed LambdaTest vs. OpenText UFT Developer Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 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
"LambdaTest offers geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!""Without a doubt, LambdaTest is one of the big reasons behind our faster deployment and better team collaboration.""It is a scalable solution.""In case something goes wrong at LambdaTest end, the Support team is extremely responsive to analyze any platform-related issues.""This product offers out-of-the-box geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!""LambdaTest easily integrates with leading project management, bug tracking, and CI-CD tools like Jira, Asana, Jenkins, Circle CI, and more.""The slow nature of a cloud platform was compensated with parallel testing, and now we are able to finish our testing job faster than it was before COVID.""Stability-wise, I have not experienced any downtime or other performance issues."

More LambdaTest Pros →

"The most valuable feature is stability.""The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks.""The solution is very scalable.""The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases.""This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us.""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.""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.""The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."

More OpenText UFT Developer Pros →

Cons
"It would be nice to have an API for visual regression testing.""You cannot perform native-app testing, as they offer simulation for web testing only.""I think Lambdatest is a valuable tool for our team and things that have room for improvement would be mobile app testing, as it can be an important addition to the tool.""The scalability is good with Amazon, but IBM had some issues.""I've also had some issues with the speed of certain API calls and the rendering of data. For example, when I'm onboarding data, the process can be slow.""Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis...There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time.""I would like to see all of the features available in the freemium plan so that I can test them.""I feel that the automated screenshot testing takes a little longer on MacOS sometimes."

More LambdaTest Cons →

"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'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.""In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure.""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.""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.""The pricing could be improved.""Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise.""UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."

More OpenText UFT Developer Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "LambdaTest is on the cloud, offers both free and paid plans which start at $19 USD per month."
  • "This is an affordable product."
  • "The pricing for LambdaTest is affordable, and one of the reasons we implemented it."
  • "It is affordable as compared to similar SaaS solutions."
  • "LambdaTest is priced well, which is why we migrated to it."
  • "It is free to start, which means you can actually see how it works and then take the decision to buy."
  • "It is 60% cheaper and there is no fuss in maintaining the lab, so we have more time to do the testing."
  • "LambdaTest is paid per execution."
  • More LambdaTest Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."
  • "The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."
  • "The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
  • "When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."
  • "It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
  • "The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
  • "Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."
  • "The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."
  • More OpenText UFT Developer Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Stability-wise, I have not experienced any downtime or other performance issues.
    Top Answer:The price of the product is available online on the AWS Pricing Calculator, which doesn't involve any hidden charges. The product can be described as an averagely-priced solution.
    Top Answer:I won't be able to comment on what could be improved in the solution since I am not the one who handles LambdaTest. It is our company's IT team that takes care of LambdaTest. Improvements on a… more »
    Top Answer:There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership.
    Top Answer:The pricing is competitive. It is affordable and average.
    Top Answer:Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars.
    Ranking
    14th
    Views
    4,867
    Comparisons
    2,996
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    430
    Rating
    8.0
    16th
    Views
    3,361
    Comparisons
    2,036
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    452
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
    Learn More
    Overview

    LambdaTest is a cloud-based cross browser testing platform that helps enterprises run web automation tests at scale (through parallel testing).

    **Selenium Automation Grid and Cypress CLI on LambdaTest**
    You can attain better browser coverage by running tests across 2,000+ different browsers, devices, and operating systems online. LambdaTest provides a secure, scalable, and reliable cloud-based Selenium Grid that helps run Selenium tests at a faster pace.
    The Cypress CLI on LambdaTest, helps you expand Cypress test coverage to 40+ browser versions across Windows and macOS platforms.
    Along with automation testing, you can also perform manual tests, visual UI tests, and real-time tests.

    **LT Browser - Responsive Web Testing**
    Additionally, LambdaTest also offers LT browser - a path-breaking developer-oriented tool that helps assess the responsiveness of your website. LT Browser eases the task of mobile testing as responsive tests can run against 50+ different device resolutions.
    You can also create custom device (or viewports) and test localhost URL without any extensions (or tunnels).

    **Key Features of LambdaTest Platform**
    1. Selenium Web Testing Automation.
    2. Selenium Grid For Mobile Web-Automation Testing.
    3. Run Cypress Tests Across 40+ Browser Versions Of Chrome, Firefox, and Edge.
    4. Parallel Testing For Faster Go To Market Launch.
    5. Continuous Testing with Continuous Integration Tools (e.g. Jenkins, Circle CI, GitLab CI, etc.).
    6. Live Interactive Browser Compatibility Testing.
    7. Scroll Sync To Test Two Viewports Simultaneously Using LT Browser App.
    8. Faster Automated Screenshot Testing.
    9. API For Continuous Testing.

    With OpenText UFT Developer, you get object identification tools, parallel testing, and record/replay capabilities.
    Sample Customers
    Bringmax, Totpal, Nethhouse, Integreplanner, Cognizant, Vendisol, Clearscale, Edureka
    Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company50%
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Aerospace/Defense Firm10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization39%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Financial Services Firm7%
    Retailer5%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Comms Service Provider12%
    Manufacturing Company12%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm22%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Energy/Utilities Company7%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business35%
    Midsize Enterprise35%
    Large Enterprise29%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise47%
    Large Enterprise37%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business5%
    Midsize Enterprise24%
    Large Enterprise71%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise76%
    Buyer's Guide
    LambdaTest vs. OpenText UFT Developer
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about LambdaTest vs. OpenText UFT Developer and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    LambdaTest is ranked 14th in Functional Testing Tools with 17 reviews while OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 16th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews. LambdaTest is rated 9.0, while OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of LambdaTest writes "Cost-effective, good integration, and parallel testing leads to good performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". LambdaTest is most compared with BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, Katalon Studio, Perfecto 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 LambdaTest vs. OpenText UFT Developer report.

    See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation Tools vendors.

    We monitor all Functional Testing 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.