We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and Qualitia Automation Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools."The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner."
"I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."
"The solution has good out-of-the-box protocols."
"The most valuable feature for me is that it works on multiple platforms and technologies."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"The stop automation is a great feature."
"The best feature of this solution is the fact that it offers scriptless automation. You don't need to know how to code or program to use it."
"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis."
"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
"Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"The integrations for this solutions could be improved, specifically for Slack."
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Test Automation Tools with 89 reviews while Qualitia Automation Studio is ranked 23rd in Test Automation Tools with 5 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while Qualitia Automation Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qualitia Automation Studio writes "Good Tool for Non Technical Users". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite, whereas Qualitia Automation Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca and Selenium HQ.
See our list of best Test Automation 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.
